www 


*    In  the  Matter  of  the  Investigation  of 
certain  charges  against 

♦ 

:  Hon.  WM.  B.  SMITH,  Mayor, 


BY 


I'RESENTED  TO  COMMON  COUNCIL, 


SEPTEMBER  13th.  1886. 


r  ■ 

M 

^  PHILADELPHIA: 

1)1  NT.AP  &  CI>ARKE,  PRINTERS  AND  BINDERS,  819-21  FILBERT  STREET. 

1880. 

It        ;^  .A.     j^..     j^.  M.  :x.  M 


A  COMMITTEE  OF  COMMON  COUNCIL. 


TESTI  MON Y 


j^cpopt  of  the  Gommittee.  J 


diawu  tioia  Crerai  Librarr 


AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 

352 o 07481 
P537i 


In  the  Matter  of  the  Investigation  of 
certain  charges  against 

Hon.  WM.  B.  SMITH,  Mayor, 

BY 

A  COMMITTEE  OF  COMMON  COUNCIL. 


DuNLAP  &  Clarke,  Printers  and  Binders,  819-21  Filbert  St.,  Pliilada. 


C  ,C  Jc  C     f  < 


-C  t    ct-0  £ 

etc  C  c 
ck    ccc  c 


SELECT  COUNCIL  CHAMBER. 


Philadelphia,  September  4,  1886. 

The  Committee  assembled  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.,  this  day, 
September  4,  1886,  in  the  Chamber  of  Select  Council. 

Present : — Mr.  Roberts  in  the  Chair ;  Mr.  Eckstein,  Clerk, 
and  the  following  members  of  the  Committee — Messrs.  Ed- 
wards, Bardsley,  Iseminger,  Claridge,  Clay,  Reinstine,  and 
Lawrence,  President  of  Common  Council :  of  Counsel — Mr. 
Warwick,  the  City  Solicitor ;  as  representing  the  Mayor — 
Messrs  Earle,  Brightly,  Ruddiman,  and  White. 

THE  PRELIMINARY  PROCEEDINGS. 

]\Ir.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  The  Clerk  will  read  the  resolu- 
tion under  which  the  Committee  are  acting. 

Mr.  Eckstein  (the  Clerk),  here  read  the  resolution,  as  fol- 
lows : 

RESOLUTION 

To  appoint  a  Committee  to  investigate  accusations  against 
Hon.  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  Philadelphia,  and  the 
Management  of  the  Department  under  him. 

Whereas,  Honorable  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  Phila- 
delphia, has  been  openly  and  publicly  accused  of  high  crimes 
and  misdemeanors  in  office,  by  the  embezzlement  and  misuse 
of  public  moneys  which  have  come  into  his  hands,  and  with 
unlawfully  changing  and  so  altering  checks  drawn  to  the  order 
of  the  City  Treasurer,  in  payment  of  fees  due  the  City  of 


drawn  from  Crerar  Ubrar  v 


4 


Philadelphia,  as  to  be  enabled  to  deposit  such  checks  in  a 
private  banking  institution  to  his  account,  and  unlawfully 
retain,  embezzle,  and  misuse  the  moneys  realized  therefrom, 
and  of  other  acts  and  deeds  inconsistent  with  the  high  office 
of  Mayor  and  the  proper  management  of  the  department  under 
him,  the  same  being  in  violation  of  the  laws  and  ordinances 
governing  and  regulating  the  affairs  of  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia. Therefore, 

Resolved^  By  the  Common  Council  of  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia, that  a  Committee  of  seven  members  be  appointed  to 
investigate  the  aforesaid  accusations,  with  full  power  and 
authority  to  send  for  persons,  papers,  books,  and  documents 
in  the  hands  and  possession  of  whomsoever  the  same  may  be, 
and  the  production  and  examination  thereof  before  the  Com- 
mittee to  compel  and  require.  The  Committee  in  discharge  of 
their  duties  to  exercise  all  the  powers  conferred  by  the  Act  of 
Assembly  approved  17th  day  of  May,  A.  D.  1883,  entitled 
"An  Act  authorizing  Councils  in  cities  of  the  first  class  to 
issue  subpoenas  and  take  the  testimony  of  witnesses  concerning 
the  management  and  accounts  of  any  of  the  Departments  of 
said  City,  or  any  other  matter  which  may  be  subject  to  their 
supervision,  also  providing  for  the  compulsory  production  of 
books  and  papers,  and  a  mode  of  compelling  the  attendance  of 
witnesses  by  attachment  for  contempt,  and  authorizing  and 
defining  the  punishment  therefor."  And  the  said  Committee 
are  hereby  instructed  and  directed  to  make  report  to  Common 
Council,  at  a  special  meeting  to  be  held  Thursday  next  (Sep- 
tember 9th),  at  three  o'clock  P.  M.,  as  to  the  truth  or  falsity 
of  such  accusations.  And  if  the  truth  of  such  accusations  be 
established  by  the  facts  and  proofs  exhibited  before  said  Com- 
mittee, that  their  report  be  accompanied  by  articles  of  impeach- 
ment against  Hon.  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  Philadelphia. 
For  the  better  discharge  of  their  duties  the  Committee  are 
hereby  empowered  to  employ  a  stenographer. 


5 


Resolved^  That  the  City  Solicitor  be,  and  he  is,  hereby- 
requested  and  directed  to  attend  all  meetings  of  the  said  Com- 
mittee, that  all  the  rights  of  the  Committee  may  be  exercised 
and  the  interests  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia  protected. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  (addressing  Mr.  Johnson,  the  Mes- 
senger of  the  Committee)  :  Mr.  Johnson,  did  you  serve  the 
subpoenas  as  ordered  by  the  Committee  ? 

Mr.  Johnson  :  Yes,  sir. 

(The  Clerk  of  the  Committee  here  reads  the  list  of  the  wit- 
nesses ordered  to  be  subpoenaed  by  the  Committee,  and  as 
their  names  are  called  those  of  the  witnesses  present  before 
the  Committee  answer  to  their  names.) 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  :  Is  the  notary  present  ? 

Mr.  Eckstein,  the  Clerk :  Yes,  sir. 

(Mr.  Charles  White,  a  notary  public,  here  appears  as  ready 
to  perform  the  duty  for  w^hich  he  was  selected,  in  the  swearing 
of  witnesses.) 


George  W.  Jolmson^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Certain  of  the  gentlemen  who  Avere  upon  the  list  of  wit- 
nesses to  be  subpoenaed  are  not  present.  Why  are  they  not 
present  ? 

A.  Because  some  of  them  could  not  be  found,  and  others  of 
them  were  out  of  the  city  and  couldn't  be  reached  in  the  short 
time  that  was  given. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Have  all  responded  who  were  subpoenaed  ? 

A.  All  save  one  man,  Mr.  Garman.  He  told  me  that  he 
would  be  right  down.  Every  man  that  I  saw  personally  has 
answered  to  his  name  except  that  one. 


6 


Mr.  Bard  si  ey  :  In  common  with  others,  I  have  seen  it  stated 
in  the  papers  that  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  has  frequently  said 
that  the  charges  which  the  Clerk  has  just  referred  to  were  not 
true.  It  has  always  been  customary,  when  Committees  of 
Councils  were  investigating  Departments  of  the  City,  to  first 
hear  from  the  party  charged ;  because,  perhaps,  his  explana- 
tion may  be  entirely  satisfactory,  and  save  the  time  of  the 
Committee  as  well  as  the  time  of  the  witnesses.  Cases  have 
occurred  where  the  explanations  were  entirely  satisfactory. 
In  order  that  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  may  have  an  opportunity 
now,  before  we  commence  the  examination  of  witnesses,  I 
would  suggest  that  you  invite  the  gentlemen  who  represent 
his  Honor  to  make  any  statements  looking  to  the  refutation  of 
the  charges  that  they  in  their  judgment  may  deem  propei". 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman:  Is  it  the  pleasure  of  the  Com- 
mittee that  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  Bardsley  should  be  carried 
out? 

(Upon  the  question  being  put  to  the  vote,  it  was  agreed  to 
by  the  Committee.) 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman):  Are  the  counsel  of  the  Mayor 
present  ? 

Mr.  Ruddiman  :  I  am  honored  to  be  so  engaged.  I  have 
the  honor  to  appear,  Avith  others,  as  counsel  for  his  Honor,  the 
Mayor,  and  to  present  to  you,  at  his  request,  in  the  first  in- 
stance, a  letter  which  I  shall  place  in  your  hands,  for  the  Com- 
mittee, to  be  presented  through  you.  His  Honor  is  not  himself 
present,  save  by  counsel,  but  will  be  present  immediately  upon 
any  call  at  the  instance  of  the  Committee.  He  is  of  the  opinion, 
as  are  his  counsel,  that  this  statement,  just  presented  to  the 
Committee,  will  be  of  material  value  in  assisting  the  labors  of 
the  Committee,  and  I  am  very  much  indebted  for  the  sugges- 
tion of  the  honorable  member  of  the  Committee,  who  has  given 
me  the  opportunity  of  presenting  this  paper.  I  present  it  on 
behalf  of  his  Honor,  wdth  the  intention  that  it  shall  be  read, 
and  with  the  hope  that  it  will  aid  the  labors  of  the  Committer, 


7 


^nd  with  the  assurance  upon  his  part  that  he  will  be  at  your 
entire  service  at  the  demand  of  the  Committee,  at  any  moment, 
for  any  purpose,  respecting  your  labors. 

Mr.  Bardsley :  I  move  that  the  paper  just  presented  by 
counsel  for  the  Mayor  be  read. 

Upon  the  question  being  put  to  a  vote,  it  was  agreed  to. 
Whereupon  the  communication  from  his  Honor,  the  Mayor, 
was  read  by  the  clerk,  as  follows : 

Office  of  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia 

September  3,  1886. 

Charles  Roberts,  Esq., 

Chairman  and  Members  of  the  Committee  of  Investigation, 

under  Resolution  of  Common  Council  of  September  2,  1886. 

Gentlemen  : — I  am  this  day  in  receipt  of  a  communication 
from  the  Clerk  of  Common  Council  enclosing  a  copy  of  the 
resolution  of  Common  Council  appointing  your  Committee,  and 
the  names  of  the  members  thereof,  with  notice  of  a  meeting  to- 
morrow at  10  A.  M. 

In  the  preamble  to  said  resolution  it  is  recited  that  as  Mayor 
of  tlie  City  of  Philadelphia  I  have  been  openly  and  publicly 
accused  of  "high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  in  office  by  the  em- 
bezzlement and  misuse  of  public  moneys  which  have  come  into 
his  hands,  and  with  unlawfully  changing  and  altering  checks 
drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer  in  payment  of  fees 
due  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  so  as  to  be  enabled  to  deposit  such 
checks  in  a  private  banking  institution  to  his  account,  and 
unlawfully  retain,  embezzle  and  misuse  the  moneys  realized 
therefrom." 

Such  accusations,  while  heretofore  discussed  in  public  news- 
papers, have  not  been  presented  in  any  shape  which  it  seemed 
proper  for  me  to  notice,  but,  coming  from  your  Committee,  I 
am  now  afforded  an  opportunity  of  replying  which  it  gives  me 
pleasure  and  relief  to  avail  myself  of.    Therefore,  out  of  re- 


8 


spect  to  your  Committee  and  to  the  honorable  body  which  you 
represent,  and  of  which  you  are  a  part,  I  think  it  incumbent 
upon  me,  at  this  time,  before  you  proceed  with  your  labors,  to 
lay  before  you  a  clear  statement  of  my  connection  with  any 
funds  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia  during  the  current  year. 

The  moneys  which  came  into  my  office  during  this  year 
amounted  in  the  aggregate  to  $10,071.03,  made  up  as  follows  : 


For  coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale, 
For  retail  oil  licenses,  . 
For  theatrical  licenses,  .  , 
For  gunpowder  licenses, 
For  redemption  of  dogs,  etc., 
For  sale  of  cow,  horse  and  wagon. 
For  fines  on  Police  officers, 
For  pawnbrokers'  licenses,  issued 
For  pawnbrokers'  licenses,  not  yet  granted, 

Total,  "  


.  $330  00 
450  00 
350  00 
25  00 
886  00' 
15  75 
14  28 
2,700  00 
5,300  00 

$10,071  03 


The  first  four  items  of  the  above  account,  being  coal  oil 
licenses  (wholesale  and  retail),  theatrical,  and  gunpowder 
licenses,  amounting  in  the  aggregate  to  $1,155.00,  were  paid 
directly  to  my  Secretary,  John  L.  Linton,  by  the  parties  ap- 
plying for  the  same.  The  money  (except  one  hundred  and 
fifty  (150)  dollars,  paid  to  the  City  Treasurer  on  the  day  of 
its  receipt,  August  31,  1886)  was  in  his  charge  (not  mine) 
until  the  27th  of  August,  ultimo,  when,  in  accordance  with 
the  opmion  of  the  City  Solicitor,  I  directed  its  payment  into, 
the  City  Treasury. 

By  contract  entered  into,  and  in  pursuance  of  ordinances  of 
the  city  between  myself,  as  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia, 
and  the  Women's  Branch  of  the  Pennsylvania  Society  for  the 
Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals,  it  was  agreed  that  all 
moneys  for  the  redemption  of  dogs,  etc.,  should  be  paid  "  ta 
such  officer  or  officers  as  the  Mayor  of  the  said  city  may  desig- 
nate."   Under  the  same  I  designated  Howard  March,  my 


9 


Chief  Clerk,  as  the  recipient  of  said  money,  and  during  this 
year  there  was  paid  to  him  the  sum  of  $886.00  on  said  ac- 
count. After  so  designating  him  I  knew  nothing  personally 
of  its  custody  until  it  was  paid  into  the  City  Treasury.  I 
never  had  any  personal  control  or  custody  of  any  of  said 
monev,  or  of  the  two  following  items  in  his  account — "  Sale  of 
cow,  horse  and  wagon  and  fines  from  officers,"  amounting  to 
$30.03,  all  of  which  were  directly  accounted  for  by  him  to  the 
City  Treasurer. 

As  to  the  law  relating  to  pawnbrokers,  I  have  been  guided 
by  the  advice  of  my  counsel,  Isaac  H.  Shields,  Esq.  The  law 
which  authorizes  the  Mayor  to  issue  such  licenses,  directs  him 
to  require,  as  preliminary  to  the  same,  the  filing  of  a  bond, 
the  depositing  of  a  policy  of  insurance,  and  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  the  good  moral  character  of  the  applicant.  Until 
such  necessary  conditions  are  complied  with,  the  Mayor  is  not 
obliged  or  authorized  to  issue  a  license,  the  money  for  which 
is  made  payable  to  the  City  Treasurer,  and  not  to  the  Maj^or. 
It,  however,  had  been  the  custom  for  the  pawnbrokers  on 
making  their  application  and  before  any  other  steps  were  taken, 
to  deposit  their  one  hundred  dollars  with  the  Mayor's  Secre- 
tary, subject,  in  each  case,  to  the  contingency  as  to  whether 
the  license  would  be  finally  granted  or  not. 

Upon  the  question  as  to  whether  such  moneys  could,  in  any 
sense,  be  considered  ''public  moneys  in  my  hands  "  until  all 
the  preliminaries  were  perfected,  I  took  the  opinion  of  my 
counsel,  Mr.  Shields,  and  was  advised  by  him  that  they  were 
not  the  money  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia  until  the  license 
should  be  granted  :  that  the  Secretary  could  only  receive  them 
as  the  agent  of  the  applicant,  and  that  it  would  be  his  dut}^  to 
repay  them  to  the  applicant  in  the  event  of  any  subsequent 
refusal,  for  any  valid  reason,  to  grant  the  license.  He  further 
advised  me  that,  in  granting  the  license,  it  was  my  duty  to  im- 
mediately pay  the  money  in  each  case  to  the  City  Treasury. 
Acting  upon  such  advice,  that  they  were  not  public  moneys 
until  the  license  was  granted,  I  deposited  such  money  in  my 
2 


10 


own  name,  in  an  account  which  I  have  had  w^ith  the  Fidelity 
Insurance  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Company  for  many  years. 
This  account  was  originally  opened  on  December  8,  1880,  and 
several  years  before  my  election  as  Mayor,  in  my  name  as 
"  Treasurer."  The  reason  for  this  was,  that  as  I  was  entrusted 
with  a  great  variety  of  funds  from  a  number  of  societies  in 
which  I  held  official  position,  as  well  as  from  other  sources 
apart  from  my  business,  though  in  some  instances  personal, 
and  in  amounts  so  small  as  not  to  justify  separate  accounts 
for  each  deposit,  I  thought  it  advisable  and  proper  to  open  an 
account  that  could  be  easily  distinguished  from  that  connected 
with  my  business,  and  so  did  under  the  name  of  "  William  B. 
Smith,  Treasurer."  In  one  instance  where  the  amount  justi- 
fied it,  I  did  have  a  separate  account  as  "  Trustee,"  and  it  was 
partially  for  that  reason  that  I  selected  the  new  term  "  Treas- 
urer "  for  this  general  account.  The  sum  of  $48,095.71  has 
been  deposited  by  me  to  that  account  during  this  year,  of 
which  but  about  $8,000  consisted  of  the  license  and  fees  in 
question.  Not  believing  the  money  to  be  public  money,  and 
knowing  full  well  my  own  financial  ability  to  repay  the  same, 
I  may  have  been  careless  in  some  instances  in  keeping  my 
balances  up,  but  I  acted  in  good  faith  and  with  no  intention  of 
wronging  the  city,  as  is  evidenced  by  my  immediate  payment 
of  the  whole  amount  into  the  City  Treasury  when  so  advised 
by  the  City  Solicitor,  upon  the  same  day  I  received  such 
advice. 

The  sum  of  twenty-seven  hundred  (2,700)  dollars  in  my 
above  account  for  "Pawnbrokers'  Licenses,  issued,"  was  paid 
into  the  City  Treasury,  in  each  instance,  on  the  day  the 
licenses  were  issued — the  plan  which  I  had  previously 
followed  without  official  or  public  criticism  or  complaint.  If, 
therefore,  according  to  the  advice  of  my  counsel,  as  I  have 
above  stated,  the  moneys  which  had  thus  come  into  my  pos- 
session remained  the  property  of  the  applicant,  and  did  not  in 
anywise  constitute  a  part  of  the  funds  of  the  city  until  the 
transaction  between  the  city  and  the  applicant  had  become 


11 


wholly  completed,  it  cannot  fail  to  appear  that  in  no  sense, 
technically  or  otherwise,  could  I  have  been  an  embezzler  or 
misuser,  in  the  purport  of  the  resolution  adopted,  of  a  cent  of 
the  money  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia. 

In  no  respect  and  to  no  extent,  I  respectfully  contend,  can 
I  be  charged  with  the  embezzlement  or  misuse  of  the  moneys 
of  any  person  or  persons  when,  at  the  demand  of  such  person, 
as  at  the  direction  of  the  City  Solicitor,  I  was  prepared  at  any 
moment  either  to  pay  back  to  the  person  or  over  to  the  city 
any  and  all  amounts  in  my  hands. 

I  desire  now  to  respectfully  call  your  attention  to  what  I 
may  call  the  second  of  the  charges  meant  to  be  formulated 
against  me  in  the  resolution  providing  for  your  appointment, 
that  is  to  say,  "with  unlawfully  changing  and  altering  checks 
drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer  in  payment  of  fees 
due  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  so  as  to  be  enabled  to  deposit 
such  checks  in  a  private  banking  institution  to  his  account, 
and  unlawfully  retain,  embezzle,  and  misuse  the  moneys  real- 
ized therefrom." 

Concerning  this  alleged  imputation  I  am  able  to  submit  to 
you  a  clear  and  positive  denial  of  the  charge  itself,  or  of  any- 
thing which  may  be  meant  to  be  inferred  from  it.  No  checks 
as  stated  were  ever  so  altered  by  me  or  with  my  knowledge  or 
consent.  All  checks  endorsed  by  me  were  in  every  instance 
brought  to  me  by  my  secretary,  and  the  indorsement  signed 
by  me  in  the  form  in  which  they  were  first  presented.  I  had 
no  intercourse  with  the  makers  of  the  checks  or  the  parties 
who  brought  them,  and  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  what 
occurred  between  them  and  the  secretary. 

I  have  now  briefly  and  truthfully  endeavored  to  present  be- 
fore the  Committee  all  the  knowledge  which  I  myself  possess, 
and  all  the  information  which  I  have  credibly  received  upon 
the  subjects  which  seem  to  be  the  essential  matter  of  your  in- 
vestigation. I  do  not  regret  the  constitution  of  your  Com- 
mittee, or  that  the  inquiry  has  been  taken  out  of  the  region  of 
irresponsible  statement  or  publication.    I  do  not  fear,  under 


12 


the  direction  of  the  calm,  fair,  and  impartial  consideration 
which  this  Committee  will  bestow  upon  the  whole  case,  any 
result  of  your  deliberations  as  affecting  myself  or  my  official 
conduct.  If  I  have  committed  mistakes,  that  is  a  common 
weakness  of  humanity,  but  I  affirm  solemnly  that  no  intent  to 
commit  a  wrong  has  accompanied  or  been  a  part  of  them. 

Very  respectfully, 

WILLIAM  B.  SMITH, 

Mayor. 

(Upon  the  conclusion  of  the  reading  of  the  foregoing  com- 
munication from  his  Honor,  the  Mayor, 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  What  is  the  pleasure  of  the  Com- 
mittee with  regard  to  that  letter  ? 

Mr.  Clay:  I  move  that  the  Clerk  be  directed  to  preserve 
this  letter  from  his  Honor  the  Mayor,  as  a  part  of  the  records 
of  the  Committee,  so  that  we  may  have  it  any  time  for  refer- 
euce. 

(The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay,  it  was 
agreed  to.) 

TESTIMONY. 

Solomon  L.  Linse.  being  duly  affirmed  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  I  am  a  pawnbroker. 
Q.  Whereabouts  is  your  place  of  business  ? 
A.  626  South  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  the  business  ? 
A.  Nineteen  or  tAventy  years  in  that  neighborhood. 
Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  in  1885  to  conduct  your 
business  ? 
A.  I  did. 


13 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  One  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  that  JlOO  ? 

A.  To  the  order  of  William  B.  Smith. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  in  a  check  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  It  was  not  in  money  ? 
A.  It  was  a  check. 
Q.  Have  you  that  check  ? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  "Will  you  please  present  it  ? 
A.  Certainly. 

The  witness  here  produces  a  check,  which  is  read  by  the 
-clerk,  as  follows  : 

"Philadelphia,  Pa.,  January  9th,  188 If. 

No.  390. 

"  Sixth  National  Bank. 

"  Pay  to  the  Order  of  William  B.  Smith,  or 
order,  One  Hundred  Dollars. 

"(Signed.)  •  SOLOMON  L.  LINSE." 

Q.  What  are  the  indorsements  ? 

The  clerk  here  reads  the  indorsements  on  the  check,  as 
follows  : 

"  It  is  indorsed  '  William  B.  Smith.  Deposit  to  the  credit 
of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer.'  " 

Q.  Now,  have  you  a  license  ? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  license.) 

Q.  Have  you  any  receipt  for  the  payment  of  that  money  ? 

A.  I  have  no  other  receipt  but  what  you  see  (indicating 
papers). 


14 


By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  What  is  the  date  of  that  license  ? 
A.  The  26th  day  of  December,  1885. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  conditions  of  the  law  as 
to  insurance  and  bond  ? 

A.  I  was  not  asked  that  question.  I  left  my  policy  there. 
At  the  commencement,  when  I  took  out  my  license,  I  left  my 
policy. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  when  you  paid  the  money? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  you  left  that  insurance  policy  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir— in  1885. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Did  you  leave  the  policy  at  the  same  time  that  you  left 
the  check  ? 
A.  In  1885  ? 
Q.  Yes. 

A.  I  think  I  did. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman :  The  Committee  will  desire  to 
preserve  these  documents.  You  will  please  leave  them. 
They  will  be  kept  safely  and  will  be  returned  to  you. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman :  From  whom  did  you  get  the 
license  ? 

A.  From  the  Clerk.    I  suppose  his  name  is  Linton. 
Q.  Did  you  pay  any  more  than  the  $100  fee  ? 
A.  I  don't  remember. 

Q.  You  don't  remember  paying  anything  more  in  1885  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  have  you  procured  a  license  for  1886  ? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 
A.  $100. 


15 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  that  money  ? 
A.  To  the  same  party  I  paid  it  to  in  1885. 
Q.  Did  you  pay  it  in  money  or  in  check  ? 
A.  In  check. 

Q.  Will  you  please  produce  it  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check,  which  is  read  by  the 
Clerk,  as  follows  : 

Philadelphia^  Pa.^  January  8th^  1886. 

Sixth  National  Bank. 

Pay  to  William  B.  Smith,  or  Order, 
One  Hundred  Dollars. 
(Signed),  SOLOMON  L.  LINSE." 

Endorsed  "  William  B.  Smith.  Deposit  to  the  credit  of 
William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer." 

Q.  Have  you  any  license  for  the  present  year  ? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

(Tlie  witness  here  produces  license.) 

Q.  Have  you  any  receipt  for  the  money  other  than  the 
license  ? 

A.  I  always  consider  my  check  as  a  receipt  snfficient. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  this  year  with  the  conditions  of 
the  insurance  and  the  bond  ? 

A.  On  the  date  of  the  issue  of  the  license — the  paying  the 
money  or  the  check ;  the  day  that  I  paid  the  money  I  took 
an  insurance  in  trust  for  William  B.  Smith,  in  the  Firemen's 
Association,  I  think. 

Q.  In  January  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  this  license  ? 

A.  I  received  it  a  couple  of  weeks  ago.  I  cannot  tell  the 
exact  date. 


16 


Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  else  this  year  than  the  $100  ? 
A.  That  is  all  we  were  required  to  pay. 
Q.  Is  that  all  you  did  pay  ? 
A.  That  is  all  I  paid. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  The  law  prescribes  that  upon  application  for  your 
licenses  you  shall  file  testimonials  as  to  character  and  a  policy 
'of  insurance  and  a  bond? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  the  time  of  making  your  payment  of  $100  to  the 
Mayor,  was  that  payment  accompanied  with  all  the  papers  re- 
,  quired,  the  bond  and  the  policy  of  insurance  and  the  testi- 
monials of  character? 

A.  The  bond. 

Q.  And  the  policy  of  insurance  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  about  the  testimonials  of  character  ? 
A.  I  was  not  asked  any  question  about  them. 
Q.  You  were  not  asked  to  produce  them  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  same  form  gone  over  in  1886  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  and  since  I  have  been  a  broker. 
Q.  The  license  in  1885  was  issued  in  December  of  that 
year  ? 

A.  Towards  the  latter  end  of  the  year. 
Q.  You  paid  in  January  and  received  your  license  in  De- 
cember ? 

A.  No ;  I  did  not  say  that  I  received  the  license.  I  re- 
ceived it  in  the  following  December  after  I  paid  it. 

Q.  But  I  mean  you  paid  in  January  1885,  and  received 
your  license  in  December  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

You  have  testified  before  the  Committee  that  you  have 
been  engaged  in  this  business  for  nineteen  or  twenty  years  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Q.  Under  the  administration  of  Mayor  King  in  what  man- 
ner and  form  were  your  licenses  issued  ? 

A.  In  eight  or  ten  days  afterwards  we  always  received  our 
licenses. 

Q.  In  every  insta?c.ce  ? 

A.  In  every  inst?.nce,  under  all  preceding  administrations. 

Q.  Under  Mayors  Stokeley  and  Fox  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  it  might  have  been  eight  or  ten  days,  or  three 
weeks  at  the  i;tmost. 

Q.  It  was  not  until  the  administration  of  Mayor  Smith 
that  your  licenses  were  witheld  so  long  after  your  payments 
were  made  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Under  the  previous  Mayors  you  received  your  licenses 
in  the  month  of  January  ?  ^ 
A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief. 

Q.  Within  two  or  three  weeks  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  Lfter  I  paid  the  money. 

Q.  During  the  yaf.r  1885,  you  did  not  have  a  license  until 
the  thirtieth  day  of  December  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  fact  that  it  is  a  misdemeanor  to 
conduct  your  business  without  having  a  legal  license  ? 
A.  But.  I  paid  the  money. 

Q.  Did  you  consider  the  paying  of  the  money  as  having  a 
license '( 

A.  I  paid  it  to  the  person  I  always  paid  it  to. 

Q.  If  you  had  been  prosecuted  for  conducting  your  business 
without  a  license,  do  you  suppose  the  fact  of  your  having  paid 
your  money  would  have  shielded  you  from  the  offence  ? 

A.  I  thought  so. 
3 


18 


By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  Were  any  reasons  ever  given  you  by  any  officers  con- 
nected with  the  Mayor's  Department  for  withholding  your 
license  in  1885  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  never  asked. 

Q.  No  reasons  were  ever  given  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  the  case  in  1886  ? 

A.  Do  you  mean  were  my  reasons  given  ? 

Q.  Yes. 

A.  No. 

Q.  In  1886  you  deposited  a  policy  of  insurance  in  the  name 
of  William  B.  Smith  ? 

A.  In  trust  to  William  B.  Smith. 

Q.  What  had  been  the  custom  under  preceding  Mayors  ? 
A.  Just  to  deposit  the  policy  of  insurance. 
Q.  The  selection  of  the  company  was  left  to  your  discretion 
under  preceding  Mayors  ? 
A.  Always. 

Q.  The  policies  were  yours  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  first  instance  when  you  were  required  to  deliver  a 
policy  made  out  in  any  other  manner  was  under  Mayor  Smith  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  present  to  the  Mayor,  or  to  any  of  his  subordi- 
nates, a  policy  of  insurance  in  your  own  name,  this  year  ? 
A.  My  agent  has  done  it  for  me. 

Q.  Tell  the  Committee  why  your  policy  this  year  was  made 
out  in  the  name  of  William  B.  Smith,  in  trust  ? 

A.  He  asked  me  for  it — a  gentleman  they  call  Mr.  Linton. 
Q.  Did  he  refuse  to  accept  it  in  any  other  manner  ? 
A.  He  would  not  take  it  unless  I  would  do  it. 
Q.  Did  you  offer  it  in  any  other  way  ? 
A.  I  did. 


19 


Q.  In  your  own  name  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  And  it  was  refused  ? 

A.  Well,  he  asked  me,  and  I  went  up  to  the  Firemen's  Asso- 
ciation, and  I  got  a  policy,  and  they  had  it  fixed  in  trust  for 
William  B.  Smith. 

Q.  You  had  ofiered  a  policy  in  you  old  manner  of  doing  it, 
and  it  was  refused,  and  then,  as  I  understand  you,  they  asked 
you  to  have  a  policy  made  out  in  the  name  of  William  B. 
Smith,  in  trust  ? 

A.  Those  were  the  requirements  this  year  ;  and  I  consented 
to  do  it. 

Q.  When  you  were  requested  this  year  to  have  a  policy 
made  out  in  the  name  of  William  B.  Smith,  in  trust,  did  you 
have  the  policy  so  effected  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  do  that,  or  did  any  one  in  the  Mayor's  office  ? 
A.  I  done  it. 
Q.  Yourself? 

A.  Myself.  The  Mayor  didn't  do  any  work  for  me  at  all, 
or  the  Mayor's  clerk. 

By  Mr.  Claridge. 

Q.  You  presented  your  other  policy,  and  that  was  not 
accepted — as  I  have  understood  you. 

A.  You  misunderstood  me.  I  said  that  I  was  notified  of 
the  requirements  this  year,  that  I  would  have  to  have  a  policy 
to  the  order  of  William  B.  Smith,  and  rather  than  have  any 
annoyance,  or  be  put  in  any  jeopardy  in  doing  my  business 
without  a  license,  I  did  it  in  that  way. 
By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman). 

Q.  But  you  had  tendered  your  other  policy  ? 

A.  At  the  time  I  tendered  my  money. 

Q.  You  tendered  your  usual  kind  of  insurance,  and  were 
informed  that  the  other  requirement  would  have  to  be  complied 
with? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


20 

Samuel  Nathayis^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Pawnbroker. 

Q.  Whereabouts  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  No.  247  North  Ninth  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 
.    A.  Many,  many  years  before  the  incorporation — before  the 
consolidation — some  thirty  or  forty,  or  probably  fifty  years. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  any  license,  for  1885,  for  conducting 
your  business  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 
A.  One  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  The  Mayor's  secretary,  Mr.  Linton. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  it  ? 

A.  In  money.    I  always  pay  by  money. 

Q.  You  did  not  pay  by  check  ? 
A.  No ;  always  by  money. 

Q.  Have  you  your  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  produce  it  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  license.) 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  receipt  for  this  license 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  conditions  regarding  the 
insurance  and  the  bond  ? 

A.  Well,  at  the  same  time  I  paid  my  money;  on  the  31st 
of  December,  1884,  for  the  license  for  1885, 


21 


Q.  That  is,  you  anticipated  the  license  for  1885  by  paying 
for  it  in  1884? 

A.  In  consequence  of  my  policy  of  insurance,  in  order  to 
protect  the  depositors  of  the  goods. 

Q.  When  did  you  obtain  your  license — when  you  paid  your 
money  ? 

A.  No  ;  some  time  afterward. 

Q.  How  long  afterward — a  week  or  a  month  ? 

A.  To  tell  you  honestly,  I  never  gave  it  any  consideration ; 
but  it  was  some  time  afterward.    I  cannot  say  how  long. 

Q.  Was  it  a  longer  time  than  under  Mayor  King,  or  Mayor 
Fox,  or  Mayor  Stokley — longer  than  they  used  to  keep  you  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was. 

Q.  Now,  with  regard  to  the  present  year,  1886,  have  you 
procured  a  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  On  the  2d  of  January,  1886.    On  the  1st  of  January 
no  one  was  there  to  receive  the  money. 
Q.  It  was  a  holiday  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  whether  it  was  a  holiday.  I  presume 
that  the  1st  of  January  in  1885  may  have  come  on  a  Sunday, 
but  I  am  not  positive.  Before,  I  paid  it  on  the  31st.  I  am 
always  particular  about  paying  my  license  on  the  day  it  is  due, 
to  hold  my  insurance  good. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  that — in  money  or  in  check  ? 

A.  Always  in  money. 

Q.  Have  you  that  license  with  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

(The  witness  here  produces  license.) 

Q.  When  did  you  get  this  license — how  long  ago  ? 
A.  I  suppose — I  think  I  got  it  in  August,  if  I  am  not  mis- 
taken. 


22 


Q.  About  a  month  ago,  or  less  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Lawrence: 

Q.  As  you  paid  in  money,  in  notes,  and  not  by  check,  how 
do  you  know  that  you  paid  on  the  31st  of  December,  1884, 
for  the  license  of  1885  ? 

A.  I  made  the  entry  in  my  books.  I  am  always  my  own 
book  keeper. 

Q.  Then  you  know  it  by  your  books  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.     I  entered  it  in  the  cash-book  and  in  the 
ledger.    I  always  keep  my  own  books.    I  marked  it  on  the 
license,  and  copied  from  them. 
By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  say  you  have  been  engaged  in  business  for  many 
years  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Under  preceding  Mayors  how  long,  after  license  fee  wa& 
paid  and  the  requirements  of  the  law  complied  with,  did  you 
receive  your  license  ? 

A.  A  short  time  afterwards. 

Q.  Almost  immediately  afterwards  ? 

A.  Say,  for  instance,  probably  ten  days,  or  it  might 
have  been  thirty  days.  I  never  gave  it  any  consideration.  I 
entered  my  bond  and  obtained  my  insurance,  and  paid  my 
mone}^  and  attended  to  my  own  business.  When  the  license 
w^as  ready  they  would  send  it  up.  My  policy  of  insurance 
was  invariably  deposited  at  the  Mayor's  office. 

Q.  Always  in  your  own  name  ? 

A.  Always  in  my  own  name.  The  last  time  I  said  to  the 
major,  "  here  is  $30  ;  won't  you  go  to  the  corner  of  Sixth  and 
Walnut  streets  and  pay  my  insurance?"  He  said,  "  Do  you 
require  a  receipt  ?"  and  I  said,  "  Oh,  no ;  it  is  all  right ;"  and 
I  suppose  that  he  paid  it. 

Q.  Was  that  during  this  year  ? 

A.  This  year. 


23 

Q.  Then,  in  the  year  1886  you  paid  $100  license  fee  to 
Major  Linton,  and  at  the  same  time  you  gave  him  money  with 
which  to  effect  your  insurance  ? 

A.  Thirty  dollars. 

Q.  How  was  it  under  the  preceding  Mayors  ? 

A.  I  invariably  paid  my  own  insurance.  I  would  go  to  the 
Mayor's  office,  and  would  say  to  Joe  Marcer,  I  will  trouble 
you  for  my  policy  of  insurance,"  and  I  would  get  it  and  get 
it  fixed. 

Q.  HoAV  did  you  come  to  depart  from  that  rule  in  taking 
out  your  license  this  year,  in  asking  Major  Linton  to  effect 
your  insurance  ? 

A.  I  did  not  want  to  take  the  trouble  to  go  to  the  Insurance 
Company. 

Q.  Did  you  ask  him  to  do  it  ? 

A.  I  asked  him  as  a  particular  favor.  He  said,  "  Do  you 
require  a  receipt?"  and  I  said,  "Oh,  no."  He  done  it  to 
oblige  me. 

Q.  In  the  year  1885  your  license  was  paid  for  on  the  thirty- 
first  day  of  December  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  did  not  receive  it  until  the  twentieth  day  of 
August,  1885  ? 

A.  I  presume  so.    It  is  there,  (indicating  the  license). 

Q.  Were  you  subjected  to  any  annoyance  by  the  police 
officials  during  that  time  ? 
A.  None,  whatever. 

Q.  In  1886  you  paid  for  your  license  on  the  2d  of  January, 
1886? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  did  not  receive  it  until  the  20th  of  August  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  During  that  time  was  there  any  disposition  on  the  part 
of  the  Police  Department  to  annoy  you  ? 


24 


A.  None  at  all.  I  always  found  them  very  correct.  I 
have  always  been  very  friendly  with  them.  The  first  license 
I  had  was  in  the  Northern  Liberties,  under  William  Bruner, 
I  guess  it  must  be  fifty  odd  years  ago.  I  have  never  found 
any  difficulty.  If  they  did  not  send  me  my  license  at  all  I 
did  not  give  it  any  consideration.  I  don't  think  the  insurance 
is  payable  to  the  Mayor,  and  I  certainly  would  have  objected 
to  it ;  for  I  do  business  in  my  own  name. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  your  policy  of  insurance  for  this 
year  ?    Do  you  know  that  there  is  one  ? 
A.  Not  my  own  ;  I  have  not  seen. 

Q.  But  I  am  asking  you  whether  you  have  seen  your  own  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  one  ? 

A.  I  presume  so.  There  must  be.  They  must  have  it  at 
the  Mayor's  Office. 

Q.  But  you  don't  know  how  it  is  drawn  up  ? 

A.  I  don't  suppose  the  insurance  would  make  any  altera- 
tion, unless  upon  a  written  notice  by  me,  or  by  my  sanction. 
I  certainly  would  object  to  it. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  Major  Linton  any  fee  for  his  services  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  But  I  will  tell  you  one  thing;  from  the  time 
I  have  been  in  business,  which  has  been  many,  many  years,  I 
have  always  made  it  a  rule  with  them  the  same  as  with  my 
clerks ;  I  invariably  hand  them  five  dollars  for  a  New  Year's 
present,  without  their  asking  any  questions. 

Q.  It  is  just  a  little  kindness  on  your  part? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  that  is  the  reason  why  I  told  him  I 
wanted  him  to  do  me  a  favor,  and  reciprocate  by  going  over 
and  getting  my  insurance  for  me. 

Q.  Then  you  gave  him  $135  ? 

A.  I  paid  him  $130.  The  five  dollars  was  for  the  New 
Year's  present.    It  was  unsolicited  in  any  way. 


25 


Q.  I  am  not  calling  you  to  task  about  that.  You  had  a 
perfect  right  to  do  that.  But  you  paid  him  $135 — $100  for 
the  license,  $30  for  the  re-insurance,  and  $5  for  the  New 
Year's  present  for  Major  Linton  ? 

A.  As  I  had  always  done  under  previous  administrations. 

Q.  And  they  never  refused  to  take  it  ? 

A.  No.    They  would  be  very  foolish  if  they  did. 

Q.  Did  it  ever  occur  to  you,  that  it  was  your  duty  to  have 
possession  of  this  license  between  January  of  this  year,  and 
August  ?  Did  it  ever  occur  to  you  that  you  were  doing  busi- 
ness without  a  license  ? 

A.  No  sir.  It  never  occured  to  me — anything  of  the  kind. 
I  took  that  for  granted. 

Q.  That  it  was  all  correct  ? 

A.  That  it  was  all  right.  I  entered  my  bond  and  I  paid 
my  insurance,  according  to  law.  Suppose  my  license  would 
have  been  burned  or  destroyed,  I  always  considered  that  my 
policy  was  safer  in  the  Mayor's  hands  than  it  would  be  in  my 
■own  fire-proof.  I  wouldn't  keep  a  policy  of  insurance  on  my 
own  stock  of  goods  in  my  own  fire  poof.  It  would  be  safer  in 
the  Bank  or  wherever  it  was,  or  in  the  Mayor's  hands.  I  con- 
sidered it  more  secure. 

Q.  You  thought  that  your  payment  of  the  money  was  suffi- 
cient ? 

A.  Yes  sir;  and  the  entering  of  the  bond.  And  every 
ordinary  man  would  think  so. 

Q.  If  any  person  in  authority  had  come  to  you  and  said 
that  you  were  not  pursuing  your  business  according  to  law, 
unless  you  could  have  shown  him  your  license,  what  would 
jou  have  said  ? 

A.  I  would  have  gone  to  the  Mayor's  Office  and  told  him 
that  I  w^anted  my  license,  and  I  suppose  that  I  would  have  got 
it.  I  suppose  I  would  have  done  that.  But  I  have  never 
given  any  consideration  to  it.  I  supposed  that  paying  this 
money  and  entering  the  bond  was  the  protection,  all  the  same. 
4 


I 

26 

A.  J.  Mc Garry ^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman). 
Q.  What  is  your  business? 

A.  I  am  engaged  in  the  pawnbroking  business  at  the  present 
time.    I  was  formerly  a  tailor. 

Q.  "Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  At  the  northeast  corner  of  Fifth  and  Vine  streets,  and 
I  am  also  a  member  of  the  firm  of  Harvey  &  McGarry,  at  the 
southeast  corner  of  Sixth  and  Race  streets. 

Q.  For  how  long  have  you  been  in  that  business? 

A.  Many  years  ago  I  was  in  the  same  business  down  town, 
but  I  started  the  pawnbroking  business  at  Fifth  and  Vine 
streets  in  1872. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  in  1885  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 
A.  One  hundred  dollars. 
Q.  Did  you  pay  in  cash  or  check  ? 
A.  In  check. 
Q.  Have  you  that  check  ? 
A.  I  think  I  have. 
Q.  Please  produce  it. 
(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 
Q.  Have  you  knowledge  of  the  payments  for  both  firms  ? 
A.  I  can  answer  for  both.    I  attend  to  the  payments  and 
get  the  licenses  for  both. 

(The  check  produced  by  the  witness  is  here  read  by  the 
Clerk  of  the  Committee,  as  follows  : 


27 


PJiiladelpMa,  Pa.,  January  3,  1885. 

"  Penn  National  Bank,  pay  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer, 
or  bearer,  one  hundred  dollars. 

"(Signed)         A.  J.  McGARRY. 

"Endorsed  'William  B.  Smith,'  deposit  to  the  credit  of 
William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer.") 

Q.  Have  you  your  license  for  last  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  obtain  any  receipt  when  you  paid  the  money  ? 
A.  No,  sir.    I  never  had  a  receipt  in  my  life. 
Q.  Is  it  not  the  practice  to  give  receipts  in  this  business  ? 
A.  No.  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  conditions  of  the  law 
regarding  bond  and  insurance  ? 

A.  The  same  day,  I  think ;  Mr.  Harvey  signed  my  bondy 
and  I  did  his.  The  same  date  we  made  the  application  we 
signed  the  bond. 

Q.  The  day  you  paid  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  the  licenses  ? 

A.  The  latter  part  of  December — somewhere  between  Christ- 
mas and  New  Years. 

Q.  Have  you  procured  a  license  for  this  year — 1886  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  not  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  paid  for  one  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  How  did  you  pay? 
A.  By  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  the  check. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check,  w^hich  is  read  by  the 
Clerk  of  the  Committee,  as  follows) : 


28 


Philadelphia^  Pa.^  January  6,  1886. 

The  National  Bank  of  Northern  Liberties,  pay  to  William 
B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  or  order,  one  hundred  dollars. 

(Signed)  A.  J.  McGARRY. 

Endorsed — "  Pay  to  deposit  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer." 

Q.  I  notice  that  this  check  (indicating  check)  has  been  al- 
tered since  it  was  originally  drawn. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  Did  you  do  that  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 
Q.  Who  did  it  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell.  I  made  out  the  check  at  the  office,  and 
it  was  all  complete  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer.  I  don't 
know  anything  about  it  afterwards. 

Q.  How  did  it  read  when  you  left  it  at  the  Mayor's  office  ? 
Now^  it  reads,  "William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer." 

A.  This  is  one  of  the  same  kind,  which  should  read,  "  pay 
to  the  City  Treasurer;"  but  now  it  reads,  "  pay  to  William  B. 
Smith,  or  bearer." 

Q.  You  swear  that  when  you  made  and  signed  this  check 
it  read,  ' '  pay  to  the  City  Treasurer,  or  order  ?" 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  did  not  read,  "Pay  to  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer, 
or  order  ?" 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  changed  with  your  consent  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  did  not  know  anything  about  it  until  the 
check  came  back  to  me  from  bank. 

Q.  It  had  been  altered  by  some  one  in  the  mean  time  ? 

A.  That  is  the  way  in  which  it  was  returned  to  me  (indica- 
ting the  check),  and  I  cannot  say  anything  more  about  it. 


29 


Q.  How  is  it  you  have  no  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  I  will  explain  it.  The  Mayor  has  not  got  my  policy  of 
insurance  on  deposit.  The  Mayor's  Clerk  positively  refused 
to  receive  it,  unless  it  was  assigned  to  William  B.  Smith.  I 
declined  to  make  the  assignment,  as  such  was  not  the  custom, 
and  as  the  law  was  that  we  were  to  deposit  them  with  the 
Mayor,  but  not  to  assign  them. 

Q.  Is  this  the  first  year  that  the  demand  was  made  ? 

A.  1885  was  the  first  year. 

Q.  It  was  first  made  in  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  say  that  you  have  been  engaged  in  business  since 
1872? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  really  since  1859,  with  the  exception  of  the 
years  1871  and  1870. 

Q.  In  procuring  your  licenses  heretofore,  under  Mayors  who 
have  preceded  the  present  one,  what  form  did  you  resort  to  in 
order  to  obtain  your  licenses  ? 

A.  Simply  went  there  and  made  application,  and  took  a 
bondsman  along,  and  signed  the  application  and  paid  the  f  100. 

Q.  How  were  your  checks  drawn  ? 

A.  To  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer. 

Q.  Always  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  after  they  were  drawn  would  it  be  before  you 
would  receive  your  license  ? 

A.  Probably  the  next,  or  the  second  day  afterwards. 

Q.  In  looking  at  this  check  of  1885,  which  is  dated  January 

1885,  (indicating  check)  it  reads  "Penn  National  Bank,  pay 
to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer  ?" 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  the  words  "Or  Bearer  "  in  print  were  stricken 
out.    Were  they  stricken  out  by  you  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


30 

Q.  But  now  the  words  "Or  Bearer  "  have  been  inserted. 
Was  that  by  you  ? 

A.  That  is  not  my  hand  writing. 

Q.  Was  that  done  with  your  knowledge  or  consent? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  I  find  in  the  check  of  January,  1886  ;  "  National  Bank 
of  Northern  Liberties  pay  to  "  what  seems  to  have  been  "City 
Treasurer  or  order."    Is  that  correct  ? 

A.  That  is  correct.    "  Bearer  "  was  stricken  out. 

Q.  Was  the  word  "City  "  stricken  out  by  your  consent,  and 
the  name  of  William  B.  Smith  inserted  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  no  knowledge  about  that  ? 
A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  Why  did  you  draw  your  checks  to  the  order  of  the  City 
Treasurer  ? 

A.  Well,  it  is  my  custom  to  do  so  in  all  cases  where  I  have 
to  do  with  parties'  or  corporations'  money. 

Q.  And  you  thought  that  this  payment  was  due  to  the  City 
Treasurer  ? 
A,  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  in  regard  to  your  insurance  policy,  you  say  that  in 
1886  was  the  first  time  you  were  required  to — 
A.  No,  sir  ;  1885. 

Q.  What  took  place  between  you  and  Major  Linton  in  1885, 
in  regard  to  the  insurance  ? 

A.  The  Major  declined  to  receive  it  until  it  was  assigned  to 
the  Mayor. 

Q.  Did  you  make  an  assignment  to  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  have  a  policy  of  insurance  from  you  that  year  ? 
A.  None. 


31 


Q.  Did  you  receive  a  license  in  1885,  notwithstanding  no 
policy  was  deposited  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  You  have  got  it  there  before  you  (indicating 
a  license). 

Q.  Then  you  mean  to  say  to  this  Committee  that  you  had  a 
license  in  1885,  notwithstanding  there  was  no  policy  in  the 
hands  of  the  Mayor. 

A.  I  mean  to  say  this — that  I  received  it  by  mail.  And 
there  you  have  the  date  of  it  (indicating  license). 

Q.  Were  there  any  attempts  made  by  the  police  to  disturb 
you  in  the  conduct  of  your  business,  or  to  compel  you  to  meet 
the  requirements  of  the  law,  which  says  you  must  deposit  a 
policy  of  insurance  with  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  never  have  had  any  trouble  with  the  Police 
Department  in  my  life. 

Q.  Have  any  efforts  been  made  this  year  ? 
A.  None. 

Q.  So  you  have  been  permitted,  peaceably  and  quietly,  to 
<jonduct  your  business,  notwithstanding  you  have  no  license 
for  your  business  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  checks  than  those  which  you  have 
presented,  which  have  passed  through  the  Mayor's  Office  ? 
A.  Not  with  me. 

Q.  This  (indicating  a  license)  is  A.  J.  McGarry  ?  Do  you 
and  the  other  firm  do  business  under  that  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  is  it  about  that  ? 

A.  Well,  it  is  about  the  same  thing. 

Q.  Can  you  produce  the  checks  for  the  payments  for  Mr. 
Harvey's  license  fees  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 


Q.  Have  you  got  the  checks  with  you  ? 
The  witness  here  produces  a  check  for  1886. 
By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  What  about  the  checks  for  1885 — have  you  got  them  ? 
The  witness  here  produces  checks. 

Q.  Here  is  a  check  (indicating  a  check)  dated  January  3, 
1885,  it  is  Harvey  &  McGarry.  And  here  is  another  (indi- 
cating a  check),  January  6,  1886. 

A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  Are  these  checks  in  your  handwriting  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  the  words  "or  bearer"  stricken  out  by  you,  in 
both  instances  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Were  these  words  "or  bearer"  inserted  by  you?  (In- 
dicating on  check.) 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  this  your  handwriting  ?    (Indicating  on  check.) 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  change  made  by  your  direction  or  with  your 
consent  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not  know  anything  about  it  until  it  came 
to  me. 

Q.  Here  on  this  check  for  1886?    (Indicating  a  check.) 
How  was  that  check  originally  drawn  ? 
A.  To  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer. 

Q.  Was  the  change  to  "  William  B.  Smith  "  made  by  you? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  not  your  handwriting  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  made  with  your  knowledge  or  consent  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


33 


Q.  Now,  with  regard  to  the  firm  of  Harvey  &  McGarry,  in 
the  year  1885,  did  they  deposit  Avith  the  Mayor  an  insurance 
policy  and  bond,  as  required  by  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  tendered  it,  but  it  would  not  be  received 
unless  it  was  assigned  to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Notwithstanding  that  you  received  your  license  for  the 
year  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  were  permitted  to  do  business  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  has  taken  place  in  1886  with  regard  to  the  firm 
of  Harvey  &  Mc Garry  ? 

A.  The  same  thing,  except  that  we  have  not  got  a  license. 

Q.  Have  you  given  any  additional  sum  to  any  of  the  sub- 
ordinate officials  in  the  Mayor's  Office  ? 

A.  Well,  as  my  venerable  neighbor,  who  appeared  before 
me,  said,  it  has  been  a  custom  of  mine,  ever  since  I  have  been 
in  business,  to  make  the  clerks  a  New  Year's  present,  and  I 
have  done  so. 

Q.  Did  you  always  do  it  before  ? 

A.  With  one  exception,  when  Mayor  Fox  would  not  allow 
it,  for  a  single  year.    I  have  never  been  asked  for  a  dollar. 

Q.  You  paid  the  $5  in  1885  to  Major  Linton  for  each 
firm  ? 

A.  I  didn't  say  as  to  the  amount. 
Q.  What  amount  did  you  pay  ? 

A.  Possibly  it  might  have  been  a  little  more.  I  would  not 
be  willing  to  qualify  about  it. 

Q.  Was  it  any  less  than  that? 
A.  Oh,  no. 

Q.  It  was  never  less  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  made  that  payment  also  in  1886  ? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 
5 


34 


By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  In  1885,  when  you  received  those  cancelled  checks  from 
the  bank,  and  saw  they  were  altered,  did  you  make  any  objec- 
tion to  the  alteration  of  the  checks  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  did  not  go  to  the  Mayor  or  to  his  Secretary  and 
make  any  complaint  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    I  thought  they  were  a  good  thing  to  keep. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Why  did  you  think  they  were  a  good  thing  to  keep  ? 
A.  Why,  possibly  somebody  in  authority  might  attempt  to 
give  us  trouble. 

Q.  What  would  you  then  have  done  with  them  ? 
A.  I  can't  say  until  the  thing  would  arise. 

Q.  Did  you  look  upon  this  as  an  unlawful  thing  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  And  then,  in  case  the  Police  Department  attempted  to 
misuse  you  in  any  manner,  you  would  have  used  them  to  pro- 
tect yourself? 

A.  That  is  about  it. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Were  you  ever  notified  during  this  year  to  perfect  your 
license  ?  Were  you  ever  notified  by  the  Mayor,  or  his  officers, 
to  make  good  the  insurance  policy  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  cannot  say  I  was.  I  went  to  the  Mayor's 
office  once  since  the  first  of  January  and  tendered  the  policies, 
but  Major  Linton  declined  to  receive  them  unless  they  were 
assigned  to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Has  not  Major  Linton  notified  you  since  then  that  the 
Mayor  has  no  policy  of  insurance,  and  that  you  must  produce 
one  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 


35 


Q.  Then,  in  point  of  fact,  the  city  has  no  policy  of  insur- 
ance in  its  possession  from  you  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  you  have  no  right  to  pursue  the 
business  of  pawnbroking,  because  you  have  not  complied  with 
the  law  ? 

A.  I  am  well  aware  of  it,  but  I  have  made  a  tender  of  com- 
pliance with  the  law,  such  as  you  gentlemen  yourselves  have 
made,  that  we  shall  effect  an  insurance  of  $5,000,  and  deposit 
it  with  the  Mayor  for  the  benefit  of  the  depositors. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.    You  think  you  complied  with  the  law  when  you  ten- 
dered your  policy  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Ey  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Has  your  license  ever  been  called  for  by  any  of  the 
Police  Department  this  year  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  never  been  disturbed  in  your  business  ? 
A.  No,  sir.    I  have  never  been  called  upon  for  my  license 
in  my  life.    Nobody  ever  doubted  my  having  a  license. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  When  was  it  the  Mayor  refused,  or  his  Secretary  re- 
fused, to  accept  the  policy  you  tendered  ? 

A.  On  the  6th  of  January  of  the  present  year,  or  the  sixth 
day  of  the  week. 

Q.  He  refused  to  accept  that  policy,  and  you  have  conducted 
your  business  since  that  time  without  molestation  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  presume  that  the  fact  of  your  having  those 
checks  in  your  possession  would  keep  hands  ofi"? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  don't  think  anybody  had  any  intention  of 
putting  hands  on.  But  sometimes  they  are  a  little  tricky,  and 
it  is  a  good  thing  to  have  something  on  hand  to  stave  it  off. 


36 


Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  mean  that  knowing  you  had 
complied  with  the  law,  but  had  not  received  a  license,  that  you 
intended,  in  case  you  were  molested,  to  make  these  checks  a 
safe-guard  for  yourself? 

A.  That  was  my  judgment. 

Q.  That  was  your  opinion  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  : 

Q.  Have  you  turned  over  to  the  Committee  all  the  altered 
checks  in  your  possession  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  No,  sir ;  I  think  there  are  two  checks  from 
Sixth  and  Race  streets,  and  a  check  which  was  a  loan.  I 
made  a  loan  to  a  gentleman  on  the  1st  of  January,  and  I  just 
filled  that  up  for  the  City  Treasurer. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Have  you  always  paid  your  license  fees  by  check  ? 
A.  Nearly  always. 

Q.  Always  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer  ? 
A.  Always  ;  except,  possibly,  twenty-five  years  ago. 
Q.  But  I  am  speaking  of  the  transaction  of  your  business 
since  1872. 

A.  Always  since  then. 

Q.  To  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  have  those  checks  changed  or  altered  in 
the  manner  in  which  those  checks  for  1885  and  1886  have 
been  ? 

A.  Never. 


3T 


Joseph  3fekeal,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testifies 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  Pawnbroking. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 
A.  512  South  Sixth  street. 
Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 
A.  Off  and  on  since  1850. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  for  last  year,  1885,  to  con- 
duct your  business  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 
A.  One  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  more  than  one  hundred  dollars  in 
connection  with  it  ? 
A.  I  did — five  dollars. 

Q.  Did  they  ask  you  for  the  additional  five  dollars  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  paid  it  of  your  own  accord  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  The  Mayor's  Clerk. 
Q.  How  did  you  pay  the  money  ? 
A.  By  check. 

Q.  Have  you  the  check  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q.  Have  you  the  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  it  ? 

A.  On  the  twenty-sixth  day  of  December. 


38 


Q.  Have  you  any  receipt  ? 

A.  No*;  nothing  more  than  the  check. 

» 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  conditions  regarding  the 
insurance  and  bond  ? 

A.  The  same  day  or  after. 

Q.  They  day  you  paid  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  got  the  policy  from  the  Clerk  and  had  it  re- 
newed. 

Q.  With  regard  to  this  year,  1886,  did  you  pay  any  money 
for  a  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  The  sixth  day  of  January. 
Q.  Will  you  please  produce  it  ? 
(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q.  Have  you  the  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 
A.  For  this  year? 

Q.  This  year. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  regulations  this  year 
regarding  the  insurance  and  bond  ? 

A.  A  few  days  after  I  renewed  my  license. 

By  Mr.  Edwards: 

Q.  Where  did  you  draw  these  checks — at  your  place  of 
business,  or  at  the  Mayor's  office  ? 

A.  I  think  at  my  place  of  business. 

Q.  Both  checks  ? 

A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  You  are  not  positive  ? 

A.  I  am  not  positive. 


39 


By  Mr.  Bardslej  : 

Q.  I  notice  that  the  check  for  1886  is  pay  to  ^'  Mayor 
Smith  or  order."  Is  that  the  way  you  always  drew  them,  in 
favor  of  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Every  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  you  make  your  policy  of  insurance  ? 

A.  Last  year  it  was  in  my  own  name.  This  year  it  was  in 
my  own  name,  but  I  had  it  transferred  to  the  Mayor.  Mr. 
Linton  required  it. 

Q.  You  were  instructed  at  the  Mayor's  office  that  it  was 
the  necessary  course  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  notice  by  the  receipt  at  the  foot  of  this  (indicating 
license)  that  the  city  received  this  money  on  the  23d  of 
August  ? 

A.  I  paid  it  long  before  that. 

Q.  You  paid  it  on  the  date  of  the  check  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  January  6th  ? 
A.  No,  the  5th. 

Q.  Previous  to  Mayor  Smith's  term,  when  did  you  pay 
your  licenses  ? 

A.  I  couldn't  say  when  I  paid  them  ;  but  here  are  the 
licenses,  two  of  them.  Mayor  King's. 

(The  w^itness  here  produces  licenses.) 

Q.  Now,  for  '83  the  license  reads  that  the  City  Treasurer 
received  the  money  on  the  3d  of  January,  and  that  the  license 
was  issued  to  you  on  the  same  date.  For  '84  the  city  received 
the  money  on  the  14th  of  January  and  you  must  have  paid  * 
the  money  about  the  5th  of  January.  So  it  appears  to  have 
been  your  custom  to  pay  this  money  early  in  the  year  ? 

A.  Always  in  January,  never  later. 


40 

Q.  Previous  to  last  year  you  received  your  licenses  very 
soon  after  you  paid  your  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  After  you  paid  in  '85  you  didn't  receive  your  license 
until  26th  of  December  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  paid  your  money  in  January  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Previous  to  '85  you  received  your  license  soon  after  you 
paid  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  But  in  '85  you  paid  your  money  in  January  and  re- 
ceived your  license  in  December  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ask  for  it  ?    Did  you  make  any  inquiry  why 
you  didn't  receive  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  think  ? 

A.  I  thought  that  my  check  was  receipt  enough  for  the 
money. 

Q.  But  did  you  make  no  inquiry  or  demand  for  the  license  ? 
A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  You  didn't  care  whether  you  got  it  or  not  ? 
A.  I  was  not  very  particular. 

Q.  You  paid  your  money  and  you  thought  it  was  all  right  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  in  '86  you  made  no  demand  for  the  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  didn't  care  whether  you  got  it  or  not  ? 
A.  Of  course,  I  would  rather  have  it,  but  I  didn't  think  it 
worth  while  to. 

Q.  You  didn't  care  enough  to  ask  for  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


41 

Q.  The  policy  of  insurance  for  this  year  '86  is  to  the  order 
of  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  Transferred  to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  In  '85  it  was  in  your  own  name? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  According  to  the  requirements  of  the  Mayor's  office  it 
was  done  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  paid  the  cus- 
tomary New  Years  present  to  the  Clerk  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  always  do  that  ? 

A.  Ever  since  I  have  been  in  business. 

Q.  They  never  refused  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  think  it  was  the  proper  way  to  do — not  to 
give  you  your  license  ? 

A.  No ;  I  didn't  think  it  was  the  proper  way. 

Q.  Did  the  police  ever  come  and  say  where  is  your  license? 
A.  Never. 

Q.  You  never  was  molested  in  your  business  ? 
A.  Never — in  any  shape  or  form. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  to  the  Committee  whether  it  would 
have  been  possible  in  any  way,  if  you  were  disposed  to  evade 
the  laAv,  for  the  Mayor  to  have  taken  you  to  account,  or  to 
have  compelled  you  to  obey  the  law  or  have  made  you  suffer 
loss,  or  have  injured  or  disturbed  or  interfered  with  you  in 
any  way — by  reason  of  your  not  having  a  license  ? 

A.  He  had  no  reason  for  keeping  it  back.  It  was  his  fault 
and  not  mine. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  this :  whether  it  would  have 
aided  in  any  way  in  compelling  you  to  a  compliance  with  the 
6 


42 


law,  or  whether  there  was  any  check  upon  you  by  the  Mayor 
retaining  your  license  and  not  giving  it  to  you  ? 

A.  He  had  no  reason  to  do  so.  There  was  nothing  at  all 
against  my  character. 

Q.  Your  conduct  was  in  accordance  with  the  law  at  all 
times  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


Jacob  Rosenthal,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testifies  as^ 
follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman). 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  I  am  a  pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  No.  1813  South  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 

A.  In  the  neighborhood  of  nine  or  ten  years. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  for  1885  for  doing  business  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  for  it. 
A.  «100.. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  by  check  or  cash  ? 
A.  By  check. 

Q.  Have  you  got  the  check  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  destroyed  the  checks  for  last  year. 

Q.  You  didn't  retain  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  About  the  first  week  in  January. 
Q.  When  did  you  get  your  license  ? 
A.  In  December. 


43 

Q.  Nearly  a  year  after Avards  ? 
A.  The  last  month  in  the  year. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  regarding  the  insur- 
ance and  bond  ? 

A.  At  the  time  I  paid  my  license  he  said  I  would  have  to 
prove  my  bond  and  deposit  a  policy  of  insurance  in  the  hands 
of  the  Mayor.  I  told  him  all  right,  and  I  went  away  and 
never  thought  anything  about  it. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  with  the  law  at  ;  11  during  the  year? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Not  during  the  entire  year  ? 
A.  No  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  ask  you  again  for  your  policy  and  bond. 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  He  didn't  ask  you  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  went  on  last  year  without  complying  with  the  law 
in  those  respects,  through  an  oversight,  but  got  your  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Although  you  had  not  furnished  a  bond  or  insurance 
policy  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  produce  your  license. 
(The  witness  here  produces  a  license.) 
Q.  From  whom  did  you  get  this  license. 
A.  It  was  sent  by  mail. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  else  at  the  Mayor's  office  except 
the  $100  ? 

A.  I  don't  believe  I  did. 

Q.  With  regard  to  this  year,  did  you  pay  anything  for  license 
for  1886. 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  On  the  fifth  of  January. 


44 


Q.  How  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  By  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  the  check  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q,  When  did  you  get  your  license  this  year  ? 
A.  In  August. 

Q.  Had  you  in  the  meantime  complied  with  the  law  regard- 
ing the  insurance  and  bond  ? 

A.  I  had  given  my  insurance  at  the  time  I  took  the  policy 
out.  He  said  I  would  have  to  have  it  transferred  to  the 
Mayor.  And  he  gave  me  this  piece  of  paper,  showing  how  to 
have  it  transferred. 

(Producing  a  piece  of  paper.) 

Q.  Who  gave  it  to  you  ? 

A.  Major  Linton.  And  this  receipt  he  gave  me  when  I 
asked  him  for  it.    (Producing  another  piece  of  paper.) 

Q.  Have  you  taken  out  a  policy  this  year  ? 
A.  I  notified  my  agent  to  have  it  transferred  to  the  Mayor, 
and  I  presume  it  has  been  done. 

Q.  What  about  the  bond  ? 

A.  I  notified  my  father  to  go  on  my  bond,  but  I  don't  know 
whether  he  went  or  not.  Yesterday  I  went  to  the  Mayor's 
clerk  in  reference  to  my  brother's  paying  $100  ;  and  he  said 
I  want  everything  in  writing.  He  said  you  have  not  given 
me  any  bond.  I  said,  but  you  have  given  me  my  license.  He 
said,  Pw^ant  your  bond.  I  notified  my  father  to  go  on  the 
bond,  and  I  suppose  he  has  by  this  time. 

Q,  But  you  don't  know  ? 
A.  No. 

Q.  He  had  not  done  it  yesterday  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  When  did  you  receive  your  license  this  year  ? 
A.  In  August. 


45 

Q.  At  that  time  you  had  not  complied  with  the  law,  with 
regard  to  the  insurance  and — 
A.  The  insurance  is  all  right. 

Q.  But  YOU  don't  know  whether  it  has  been  transferred 
and  lodged  at  the  Mayor's  office  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  it ;  but  I  presume  it  has  been  done. 

Q.  But  you  don't  know  whether  it  has  been  done  or  not  ? 

A.  No  sir. 
By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  They  issued  your  license,  notwithstanding  your  bond 
was  not  executed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  : 

Q.  You  paid  the  money  both  years  in  January  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  got  your  license  last  year  in  December,  and 
this  year  in  August  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Although  last  year  the  insurance  requirement  was  not 
complied  with,  and  this  year  the  bond  requirement  was  not 
complied  with  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    But  I  thought  it  was  complied  with. 

Q.  It  was  an  oversight  on  your  part  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  You  received  a  receipt  from  Major  Linton  saying  that 
^100  were  received  for  a  license  for  1886,  subject  to  approval. 
What  did  you  understand  by  that  ? 

A.  I  understood  that  it  had  to  be  approved  by  the  Mayor 
in  the  first  place. 

Q.  Didn't  you  understand  that  they  required  you  to  enter 
your  bond  or  security  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 


46 

Q.  You  had  no  bond  there  at  that  time. 

A.  No,  sir.  I  had  the  insurance  policy ;  and  he  said  it 
would  have  to  be  transferred. 

Q.  And  you  ordered  your  agent  to  have  it  transferred  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Reinstine : 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  that  was  done  or  not  ? 

A.  My  agent  told  me  that  it  was. 
By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  this  business  ? 

A.  Between  nine  and  ten  years. 

Q.  What  was  the  manner  of  procuring  your  licenses  under 
the  administration  of  Mayor  King  ? 

A.  I  went  to  the  clerk  and  paid  him  $100.  He  didn't 
give  me  any  receipt,  or  nothing  whatever.  I  asked  for  a 
receipt,  and  he  said  it  was  all  right — all  right. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  besides  ?    File  a  bond  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Deliver  your  insurance  policy  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Why  not?  " 

A.  They  never  asked  for  it. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  under  a  preceding  administration  ? 
A.  I  am  speaking  about  that  too. 
Q.  You  say  they  didn't  require  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  This  check  (indicating  a  check),  which  is  made  out  pay- 
able to  the  order  of  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor,  is  it  in  your 
handwriting  ?  Why  did  you  leave  this  blank  here  ?  (Indi- 
cating on  check.) 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  is  my  hand-writing. 

Q.  How  had  you  been  in  the  habit  of  drawing  your  checks  ? 

A.  In  that  manner. 

Q.  During  the  former  administrations  also  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


47 


Daniel  Rosenthal,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testifies 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman).  > 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  Pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  1127  Poplar  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 

A.  At  that  place  about  six  years. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  money  last  year  for  a  license  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  ? 

A.  I  paid  it  on  the  31st  of  January. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  it  ? 

A.  I  paid  it  in  cash. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  receipt  at  the  time  ? 
A.  I  received  no  receipt. 

Q.  Have  you  taken  out  a  license  .for  this  year  or  paid  any 
money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  In  cash. 

Q.  For  both  years  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  got  your  license  for  this  year? 
A.  No,  sir, 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  regarding  insurance 
and  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  paid  your  money,  but  got  no  receipt,  and  have  com- 
plied with  the  law  in  other  respects  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


48 

Q.  Why  don't  you  get  your  licenses? 

A.  Because  they  say  I  didn't  pay  it.  But  I  have  two  wit- 
nesses  that  I  have  paid  it — that  seen  me  pay  it  in  cash.  I 
paid  it  on  the  5th  of  January. 

Q.  Who  are  those  witnesses  who  saw  you  pay  ? 

A.  Mrs.  E.  Devine,  who  w^ent  on  my  bond.  I  signed  the 
book  and  also  she  signed  her  name  under  it ;  and  she  is  a  wit- 
ness that  I  paid. 

Q.  What  is  her  address  ? 

A.  1810  Stiles  street. 

Q.  Who  was  the  other  witness  ? 

A,  The  other  was  my  brother,  who  came  in  and  sat  down  to- 
pay  his  own  license. 
Q.  What  is  his  name? 
A.  Jacob  Rosenthal. 

Q.  The  gentleman  who  has  just  been  examined  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  complied  w^ith  the  law  regarding  the  bond  and  in- 
surance policy  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  put  it  in  the  hands  of  the  agent  and  told 
him  to  attend  to  it. 

Q.  What  agent  ? 

A.  A  man  named  Pfeiffer,  on  Walnut  street,  aboye  Fourth,, 

Q.  An  insurance  man  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  he  attended  to  it  ? 

A.  Because  he  brought  me  the  receipts,  and  I  paid  them. 

Q.  How  do  you  know^  he  lodged  the  policy  at  the  Mayor's 
office  ? 

A.  I  put  them  there  myself — transferred  to  Smith. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  transferred  it  to  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


49 


By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  When  did  you  deposit  the  insurance  policy  ? 

A.  I  deposited  it  with  them  in  '85. 

Q.  I  mean  for  this  year  ? 

A.  Well,  they  were  down  there. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  They  are  annual  policies  and  you  got  them  renewed  ? 
A.  Yes,  s'ir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  When  you  had  it  renewed,  did  you  take  the  receipt  to 
the  Mayor's  office  this  year? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Had  the  Mayor  received  any  receipt  for  this  year's 
renewal  ? 

A.  He  brings  me  the  receipt. 

Q.  Who  does. 

A.  The  agent. 

Q.  A  receipt  from  whom  ? 

A.  From  the  Insurance  Company  ;  and  I  pay  him. 
Q.  What  did  you  do  with  that  receipt  ? 
A.  I  put  it  away. 

Q.  Then  what  knowledge  has  the  Mayor  that  that  policy  is 
renewed  for  this  year  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  I  wrote  to  the  agent  about  a  month  ago 
a,  postal  card,  asking  him  in  regard  to  it ;  that  he  should  let 
me  know  just  how  it  all  stood.  I  didn't  see  him  until  last 
night,  when  he  walked  into  my  office,  and  then  I  got  very 
little  information  from  him.  There  are  two  policies  down  in 
the  Mayor's  office,  and  I  know  one  is  paid  up  ;  but  about  the 
other  I  don't  know.  I  wanted  him  to  give  me  the  information 
just  how  the  thing  stood. 

Q.  What  did  he  tell  you  ? 

A.  He  came  to  see  me  in  the  evening,  that  is,  about  six 
o'clock,  when  I  was  closing  up,  and  I  got  very  little  from  him. 
7 


i 


50 


He  told  me  how  much  insurance  I  held — $7,000,  but  how  it 
stood  he  didn't  tell  me. 

Q.  That  is,  whether  it  was  alive  or  not,  he  didn't  know  ? 
A.  Well,  it  is  alive,  because  I  paid  up  the  receipts  when  he 
brought  them. 

Q.  Then,  what  information  did  you  want  from  him  ? 
A.  I  wanted  him  to  tell  me  how  I  stood  at  the  Mayor's 
office. 

Q.  How  could  he  tell  you  that  ? 

A.  He  knows  when  I  paid  the  receipts. 

Q.  Was  it  his  duty  to  take  the  receipt  from  the  Insurance 
Company  for  the  renewal  of  the  policy  to  the  Mayor's  office — 
was  it  his  duty  or  your  duty  to  take  it  there  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  He  came  and  brought  them  to  me  and 
I  paid  them. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  receipt  that  you  got  ?  Have 
you  got  it  with  you  ? 

A.  Not  with  me.    It  is  home. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  the  Mayor  knows,  has  not  the  policy  at 
the  Mayor's  office  expired  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  I  know  that  one  of  them  is  in  existence, 
because  I  have  got  the  receipt  for  it  at  home. 

Q.  For  hoAV  much  is  that  policy  ? 

A.  §2,500.  I  don't  know  Avhether  the  other  was  paid  or 
not. 

Q.  Then  the  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  you  don't  know 
whether  the  law  has  been  complied  with  or  not  by  depositing 
a  policy  of  insurance  for  $5,000  with  the  Mayor —  you  don't 
know  whether  you  have  complied  with  the  law  or  not  ? 

A.  I  am  not  positive.  I  wrote  to  him  to  find  out,  because 
if  it  was  not  I  would  have  complied  with  it. 

Q.  But  you  wrote  to  him  about  a  week  ago. 

A.  A  couple  of  weeks  ago,  but  he  didn't  receive  the  postal. 


51 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  the  money  ? 
A.  On  the  fifth  of  January. 

Q.  When  did  you  give  the  bond  ? 
A.  The  same  day,  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  Didn't  you  know  it  was  necessary  to  perfect  the  law  by 
giving  a  policy  of  insurance  at  the  same  time  ? 

A.  Well,  I  never  gave  it  a  thought.  I  knew  the  two  poli- 
cies were  down  there  and  I  thought  they  were  paid  up. 

Q.  Did  anybody  at  the  Mayor's  ofiice  ask  you  where  the 
insurance  was  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Didn't  they  say  a  word  to  you  about  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  They  just  accepted  the  bond  and  money  and  didn't  say 
anything  about  the  insurance  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 
Q.  Nor  you,  either  ? 
A.  Which  year  are  you  speaking  of? 
Q.  This  year. 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  don't  know  anything  about  the  insurance  for  this 
year  ?  You  only  know  you  paid  the  money  and  gave  the  bond? 
But  the  insurance  you  don't  know  anything  about  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  But  you  wrote  to  your  insurance  agent  a  week  or  two  ago 
for  information  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  this  talk  in  the  newspapers  which  kind  of  stirred 
you  up  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  wanted  to  see  if  your  house  was  in  order  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  Mayor  now  says  that  you  didn't  pay  this  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


52 


Q.  But  you  are  able  to  prove  you  did  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Had  the  Mayor  made  any  demand  upon  you  for  the 
money  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  the  Mayor's  office  knows,  you  are  carry- 
ing on  business  contrary  to  law,  because  the  Mayor  says  you 
have  not  paid  this  money  ? 

A.  But  I  went  down  to  see  him  in  regard  to  this.  I  went 
to  Major  Linton  and  talked  to  him  over  it,  and  I  had  my  two 
witnesses  that  seen  me  pay  it.  Well,  he  told  me  to  write  him 
a  letter  in  several  days  and  explain  how  it  was  done.  There 
were  the  two  witnesses  to  it.  He  afterwards  when  the  papers 
said  there  was  no  record  on  his  books  or  anything  else,  but  two 
days  ago,  on  Friday  morning,  when  I  went  with  the  person 
who  signed  my  bond,  he  admitted  that  the  book  was  signed  and 
that  the  bond  had  signed ;  but  still  he  said  that  the  money  he 
didn't  remember  to  be  paid.  But  I  said,  there  are  the  wit- 
nesses that  I  paid  it. 

Q.  What  book  did  he  refer  to  when  he  admitted  that  the 
book  was  signed  ? 

A.  Why.  it  is  a  form  in  which  he  put  my  name  at  the  top, 
and  the  ward. 

Q.  And  the  bond — that  is  your  surety  signed  on  the  same 
day  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  said,  a  few  days  ago,  that  the  bond  was  all  right, 
but  the  money  was  not  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 
A.  At  that  place,  six  year^. 

Q.  Do  you  have  to  give  security  every  year,  or  have  it  re- 
newed every  year  ? 

A.  Well,  the  last  two  years  it  has  been  a  different  party  who 
has  signed  it  for  me. 


53 

Q.  In  1885,  when  you  gave  the  bond,  did  you  give  it  the 
same  day  you  paid  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  1884  did  you  furnish  the  security  the  same  day  you 
paid  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  take  a  security  to  the  Mayor's  office  with- 
out the  money  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  are  sure  of  that? 

A.  I  paid  the  license  every  time  I  went.    I  am  surprised 
he  should  say  that  I  didn't  pay  it,  when  I  signed  and  had  my 
.  bond  there. 

Q.  What  did  you  sign  ;  the  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  didn't  sign  anywhere  else  that  you  had  paid  the 
money  ? 

A.  Well,  I  signed  in  this  book  first,  and  my  bond  signed 
after  me,  and  I  handed  him  the  money. 

Q.  You  signed  the  bond  first,  and  your  security  next,  and 
then  you  paid  down  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  always  did  that  ? 
A.  Every  year  the  same. 

Q.  The  day  you  gave  the  security  you  paid  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  went  there  without  paying  the  money,  would  he 
take  your  bond  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  so. 
Q.  Did  you  ever  try  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


54 


By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  that  money  ? 

A.  To  Major  Linton  ;  counted  it  out  to  him.  My  brother 
came  in  to  pay  his  license  and  sat  down  at  the  desk  and  seen 
it  paid. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  You  say  that  Jacob  Rosenthal  saw  it? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Ruddiman  (of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith) : 

Q.  You  say  that  you  paid  in  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  in  check  or  in  cash  ? 

A.  In  cash. 

Q.  Did  you  take  a  receipt  in  1885  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  received  none. 

Q.  Why  didn't  you  take  a  receipt  ? 

A.  I  never  thought  to  ask  for  it. 

Q.  You  got  your  license  then  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  in  August. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  the  money  for  1886  ? 

A.  On  the  5th  of  January. 

Q.  What  day  of  the  week  was  that? 

A.  I  couldn't  really  say  ;  because  I  paid  my  rent  at  the 
Fidelity  the  same  day. 

Q.  Have  you  a  receipt  for  the  payment  of  that  rent  ? 
A.  Not  with  me ;  at  home. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  look  at  the  receipt  from  the  Fidelity 
for  the  payment  of  the  rent  ? 
A.  The  other  day. 
Q.  What  other  day  ? 

A.  When  I  heard  of  the  trouble  about  the  licenses  and 
such  things  I  looked  to  see  when  I  paid,  and  I  knew  it  was 
the  day  when  I  paid  my  rent. 


55 


Q.  How  did  you  come  to  look  at  that  receipt  for  the  pay- 
ment of  your  rent  ?  What  had  the  payment  of  your  rent  to 
do  with  this  ? 

A.  Because  I  knew  that  I  paid  it  the  same  day.  I  stopped 
here  first  and  paid  Major  Linton,  and  then  I  went  to  the 
Fidelity  with  my  book  and  got  my  receipt. 

Q.  Why,  in  connection  with  your  license,  did  you  happen  to 
look  at  your  receipt  for  the  payment  of  your  rent  ? 

A.  Because  I  know  that  I  paid  them  both  the  same  day  ? 

Q.  Had  your  payment  of  it  been  questioned  at  that  time  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Why  did  you  look  at  that  receipt  if  the  payment  of 
your  license  had  not  been  questioned  ? 
A.  When  it  was  questioned  I  looked. 

Q.  At  what  time  in  the  day  on  the  fifth  of  January  did 
you  pay  this  money  ? 
A.  In  the  morning. 

Q.  Were  many  persons  present? 
A.  No. 

Q.  Who  were  present  that  you  knew  ? 

A.  Well,  we  were  sitting  there  and  waiting,  this  lady  and 
I,  for  Major  Linton  to  come  out  of  the  Mayor's  office.  After- 
wards he  came  and  took  a  seat  at  his  desk.  Then  I  paid  him 
the  money,  and  then  I  signed  the  book  and  my  bond  after  me. 

Q.  But  I  didn't  ask  you  that.  I  asked  you  whether  there 
were  many  people  there  ? 

A.  There  were  some  officers  there  and  others  in  the  large 
room. 

Q.  Were  there  many  people  attending  to  business  about 
the  Major's  desk  ? 

A.  No ;  they  were  all  out  in  the  large  room. 

Q.  There  were  a  few  in  the  room  when  you  paid  the  Major? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


56 


Q.  Who  were  present  there  at  the  time  you  paid  the  money? 
A.  Several  were  at  the  other  desk,  and  my  brother  came  in 
and  sat  in  a  chair  right  opposite  the  desk. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  before  your  brother  paid  or  afterwards  ? 
A.  Before. 

Q.  Did  you  wait  while  your  brother  paid  ? 
A.  No.    He  asked  me  to  go  on  his — 

Mr.  Bardsley :  I  would  like  to  suggest  to  counsel  that  the 
time  of  the  Committee  is  precious,  and  if  this  Committee  is  to 
report  in  favor  of  impeachment  that  these  witnesses  will  have 
to  be  summoned,  and  that  then  will  be  the  time  for  cross-ex- 
amination. It  occurs  to  me  that  this  is  an  ex  parte  examina- 
tion. I  may  be  wrong,  but  I  think  so,  and  I  submit  it  to 
counsel  for  the  Mayor  if  that  view  is  not  correct. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  :  That  is  the  idea  of  the  Chair — 
subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Committee. 

Mr.  White  (of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith).  We  will  submit 
to  the  intimation. 

M.  Ruddiman  (of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith).  I  suppose 
under  an  intimation  given  before  by  a  member  of  the  Commit- 
tee, that  we  could  ask  these  questions  when  we  deemed  proper. 
This  is  an  important  matter,  involving  the  payment  of  one 
hundred  dollars,  and  the  Committee  have  thought  it  worth 
while  to  go  into  it.  But  in  consequence  of  the  intimation  now 
given  by  the  Committee  we  will  go  no  further. 


Jacob  Rosenthal^  recalled. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Were  you  present  with  Daniel  Rosenthal,  in  January, 
1886,  when  he  paid  his  license  ? 

A.  I  came  in ;  he  was  in  the  office  already  ;  I  seen  him  lay 
down  one  hundred  dollars  on  the  counter  to  Major  Linton  ? 


57 


Q.  When  was  that  ? 
A.  On  January  fifth,  1886. 
Q.  You  say  he  laid  down  one  hundred  dollars  ? 
A.  He  laid  down  some  money ;  I  don't  know  about  its 
being  one  hundred  dollars. 
Q.  Who  took  that  money  ? 
A.  Major  Linton. 
Q.  Took  it  while  you  were  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  How  do  you  know  it  was  January  fifth  ? 
A.  Because  I  paid  my  license. 
Q.  The  same  day  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  the  way  you  fix  the  date  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  yourself  by  check  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  fix  the  date  by  the  check  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  not  altogether ;  it  is  in  my  mind ;  I  know  it 
was  about  the  fifth ;  I  was  going  to  pay  on  the  first  or  the 
second,  but  I  thought  the  Mayor's  office  would  not  be  open 
and  that  is  the  reason  I  didn't  go  there. 

Q.  The  Committe  would  like  to  know  positively  what  day 
it  was.  You  both  agree  in  saying  that  it  was  the  5th  of 
January.  The  Committee  would  like  to  know  how  you  know 
it  was  the  fifth  ? 

A.  It  is  in  my  own  mind,  in  the  first  place ;  and  in  the 
second  place,  the  check  shows  it. 

Q.  You  fix  it  by  the  check  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


58 


Moses  PMlif  Hamburg^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law 
testifies  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  have  an  interest  in  a  pawnbroking  establishment. 

Q.  Whereabouts  ? 

A.  No.  1209  South  Tenth  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  had  an  interest  ? 

A.  About  sixteen  years. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  for  1885  for  doing  business 
there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  that  license  ? 

A.  Major  Linton. 

Q.  By  check  or  in  cash  ? 

A.  By  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  it — for  1885  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q.  Have  you  a  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  it  ? 

A.  About  the  26th  of  December,  that  year. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  regarding  the  bond 
and  policy  of  insurance  ? 

A.  At  the  time  the  check  was  paid.  * 

Q.  And  you  didn't  get  your  license  until  December  ? 
A.  Not  until  December. 

Q.  With  regard  to  this  year  1886,  did  you  pay  anything? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  on  the  8th  of  January. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  by  check  again  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


59 


Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  this  year  regarding 
the  bond  and  the  insurance  ? 

A.  At  the  time  of  the  payment  of  the  money. 
Q.  When  did  you  get  your  license  this  year  ? 
A.  I  have  not  got  it  yet. 
Q.  How  is  that  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell.  I  complied  with  the  law  but  have  to 
get  it. 

Q.  Have  you  asked  for  it  ? 

A.  I  have,  on  three  different  occasions. 

Q.  When  did  you  ask  for  it  ? 

A.  Within  the  last  month  I  have  made  several  demands 
for  it. 

Q.  Personal  demands  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — to  Major  Linton. 

Q.  What  excuse  was  given  ? 

A.  That  he  was  very  busy  now  and  I  should  not  interrupt 
him  ;  that  it  would  be  sent  by  mail. 

Q.  Did  he  say  the  same  thing  each  time  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  it  ;i\^ould  be  attended  to  in  a  few  days  and 
sent  by  mail. 

Q.  But  it  didn't  come  ? 

A.  I  have  not  got  it  yet ;  but  I  have  complied  with  the 
law. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  business  ? 
A.  About  sixteen  years. 

Q.  Under  preceding  Mayors,  how  long  after  the  license  fee 
was  paid  did  you  receive  your  license  ? 

A.  From  one  to  four  weeks  ;  sometimes  in  two  or  three 
days. 

Q.  It  was  never  so  long  as  four  to  five  months,  or  ten  or 
eleven  months  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


60 


Q.  During  the  year  '85,  when  you  made  payment  of  the 
$100  by  check,  was  it  accompanied  by  the  policy  of  insurance 
and  the  usual  bond? 

A.  The  policy  of  insurance  was  there,  and  I  had  it  assigned 
to  Mayor  Smith  at  the  request  of  Major  Linton.  The  bond 
was  executed  at  the  time  the  money  was  paid. 

Q.  What  about  the  requirement  of  the  law  in  regard  to  tes- 
timonials of  character? 

A.  No  requirement  was  ever  made,  under  any  Mayor, 
about  testimonials  of  character.  Sixteen  years  of  good  repu- 
tation was  considered  sufficient. 

Q.  You  complied  with  the  law  regarding  the  policy  of  in- 
surance and  the  bond  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  you  were  required  in  '85  to  assign  it  to  the- 
Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Had  you  done  so  under  preceding  Mayors  ? 
A.  I  don't  remember. 

Q.  During  the  year  1885  you  were  without  a  license  until 
the  26th  day  of  December  ?  f 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q,  During  that  time  were  you  molested  in  any  way  in  the 
transaction  of  your  business  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  were  not  interfered  with  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  more  than  $100  at  the  time  you  obtained 
the  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  more? 
A.  Five  dollars. 

Q.  Why  did  you  do  it  ? 

A.  Oh,  we  thought  it  was  a  gratuity  to  Major  Linton- 


61 


Q.  Did  he  ask  you  to  do  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  it  was  the  custom  of  the  office,  and  had  been 
done  for  years. 

Q.  It  was  a  sort  of  Christmas  present  ? 

A.  A  New  Year's  present. 

Q.  A  perquisite  ? 

A.  A  perquisite  of  the  clerk. 

Q.  I  observe  that  these  checks  (indicating  checks)  are  in 
different  forms.  For  instance,  that  for  '85  is  drawn  Wil- 
liam B.  Smith,  Mayor,  or  order,  $100,"  while  I  find  a  note 
on  the  check  for  '86,    license  account."    Why  is  that  ? 

A.  To  show  that  it  was  not  a  business  transaction  between 
Mayor  Smith  and  the  firm.  We  wanted  to  show  what  it  was 
paid  for  to  Mayor  Smith  or  Major  Linton. 

Q.  Then  you  thought  the  Mayor  had  not  complied  with  the 
law  in  not  delivering  to  you  your  license  after  you  had  com- 
plied with  the  law  ? 

A.  We  thought  we  had  performed  our  part. 

Q.  Explain  why  you  put  on  it  "  license  fee  ?" 

A.  Because  we  didn't  get  the  license  the  year  before  until 
eleven  months  after  the  money  was  paid. 

Q.  And  you  thought  it  would  show  what  the  money  was 
paid  for  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  To  show  in  case  you  should  be  disturbed  or  interfered 
with  in  any  way. 
A.  Exactly. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Was  that  written  on  it  at  the  time  you  delivered  the 
check  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  in  the  Mayor's  office. 


62 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  For  1886  you  have  filed  a  bond  and  left  an  insurance 
policy  ? 

A.  The  policy  was  there.  Two  policies  are  there — renewed 
in  January  and  in  March.  Both  were  retained  in  Major 
Linton's  safe,  and  are  there  now. 

Q.  The  policy  is  in  the  possession  of  the  Mayor  or  in  the 
possession  of  his  subordinate  who  is  charged  with  the  custody 
of  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Each  year  you  renew  those  policies  and  take  the  re- 
ceipts ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  those  receipts  in  the  possession  of  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  There  is  no  reason  why  you  shouldn't  have  received 
your  license  ? 
A.  None  at  all. 

Q.  Yet  you  have  not  received  it  ? 
A.  Not  received  it. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Were  those  checks  drawn  in  that  way  at  the  suggestion 
of  anybody  in  the  Mayor's  office  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  the  customary  way  ? 

A.  In  1886  1  wTote  on  the  face  of  the  check  "  License  fee  " 
to  show  what  the  payment  was  for,  in  passing  through  the 
Clearing  House. 

By  Mr.  Edwards : 

Q.  Did  you  always  draw  checks  to  the  order  of  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 


63 


By  Mr.  Reinstine : 

Q.  You  drew  it  in  that  way  as  a  protection  for  yourself; 
you  thought  it  would  be  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    It  was  to  show  what  the  money  was  paid  for. 


Jacob  Myers^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law  testified  as 
follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  A  pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  108  South  Eighth  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  business  ? 

A.  In  that  place  seven  or  eight  years. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  in  1885,  to  do  business  there  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  for  that  license  ? 

A.  Major  Linton. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  him  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  positively  whether  I  paid  by  check  or  in 
money  that  year.  In  my  book  here  (examining  a  bank  book) 
it  is  "  J.  Myers,  for  license." 

Q.  What  is  the  date  of  that? 

A.  January  19. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  your  book  indicates  that  you  paid 
in  a  check,  but  you  did  not  keep  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  might  have  taken  that  check  and  deposited 
it  in  my  other  bank,  and  drawn  the  money,  because  the  other 
bank  is  nearer  the  Mayor's  Office. 

Q.  But  the  book  indicates  that  you  drew  a  check  for  that 
purpose,  but  whether  after  you  drew  the  check  you  handed  it 
to  Major  Linton  or  not  you  cannot  say  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  positively. 


64 


Q.  Did  you  get  a  license  last  year  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  it  ? 

A.  I  believe  I  got  it  in  December. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  requiring  bond  and 
insurance  ? 

A.  The  same  date  when  I  paid. 

Q.  The  day  indicated  in  your  book  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  January  19. 

A.  I  think  so ;  I  cannot  say  positively  whether  it  was  that 
day  or  not,  but  I  know  it  was  in  January. 

Q.  Now,  for  this  year,  1886,  what  did  you  do  ? 
A.  Here  is  my  check  (indicating  a  check). 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  this  check  ? 
A.  Major  Linton. 

Q.  I  see  you  say  on  it  "for  license"  ;  why  ? 

A.  I  thought  it  was  just  as  good  as  a  receipt  for  it  ? 

Q.  When  did  you  get  your  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  I  have  not  got  it  yet. 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  requiring  a  bond  and 
the  insurance  ? 
A.  I  have. 
Q.  When  did  you  ? 

A..  The  bond  I  gave  when  I  paid  the  money.  My  insur- 
ance had  to  run  to  March,  and  I  kept  the  receipt  in  my  office 
when  I  renewed  it — kept  it  in  my  office  until  a  few  weeks  ago, 
when  I  gave  it  to  Major  Linton. 

Q.  When  did  you  give  it  to  him  ? 

A.  Not  very  long  ago ;  two  or  three  weeks. 

Q.  In  whose  favor  is  the  insurance  policy  ? 
A.  To  William  B.  Smith,  if  there  is  any  loss. 


65 


Q.  Why  don't  you  get  a  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  I  generally  wait  until  the  Mayor  sends  me  the  license ; 
that  is  all  I  know. 

Q.  Have  you  asked  him  for  it  this  year  ? 
A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  You  have  paid  your  money  and  complied  with  the  law 
in  every  respect  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  thought  that  was  all  that  was  necessary. 

Q.  And  you  are  just  waiting  for  the  license  to  come  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  else  but  the  $100  at  the  Mayor's 
Office. 

A.  I  did.    It  was  always  customary  for  me  every  year,  in 
former  years,  to  pay  five  dollars,  and  I  done  it. 
Q.  Was  it  customary  under  former  Mayors  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  Did  they  ask  for  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  just  handed  it  out  ? 
A.  Just  handed  it  out. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  paid  your  license  fee,  in  1885,  about  the  19th  of 
January  ? 

A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  At  that  time  you  say  you  had  complied  with  the  law, 
so  far  as  filing  a  bond  and  delivering  a  policy  of  insurance  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  And  notwithstanding  that  you  were  without  a  license 
until  the  18th  of  December  ? 
A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  You  were  not  disturbed  or  interfered  with  at  any  time 
during  that  year  ? 
A.  I  was  not. 
9 


66 


Q.  When  you  came  to  pay  for  1886,  you  put  upon  the  face 
of  the  check,  "for  license,  one  hundred  dollars."  Why  did 
you  do  that  ? 

A.  For  my  own  protection.  In  a  general  way  I  do  that. 
I  am  the  Treasurer  of  a  Lodge  and  I  do  it  in  that  way. 
Whenever  I  pay  out  anything  for  benefits  I  put  "  sick  bene- 
fits "  on  it. 

Q.  Did  you  draw  your  checks  in  that  way  before  ? 
A.  I  think  I  did,  but  cannot  say  positively. 

Q.  Did  you  think  it  would  protect  you,  in  the  event  of 
them  not  giving  you  your  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  thought  that  if  you  were  interfered  with  by  the 
Police  Department  you  could  go  and  show  that  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  For  sometimes  there  might  be  a  little  mis- 
take by  Major  Linton,  and  I  could  show  that  to  prove  it. 

Q.  You  have  no  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  file  your  bond  in  January  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  about  your  insurance  ? 

A.  My  policy  of  insurance — the  old  one,  was  to  run  to 
March,  and  I  had  no  need  to  give  a  new  policy.  Afterwards, 
when  I  renewed  the  policy,  I  forgot  to  take  it  to  the  Mayor's 
Office,  but  when  I  heard  of  this  going  on  I  took  it  there  and 
left  it. 

Q.  Was  the  renewal  this  year  in  your  own  name  ? 
A.  The  same  way  that  it  was  before. 

Q.  To  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  you  delivered  that  receipt,  did  you  make  a  de- 
mand for  your  license  ? 
A.  I  did  not. 


67 

Q.  Did  they  offer  to  give  it  to  you  ? 
A.  They  did  not. 

Q.  When  did  you  deliver  that  receipt  ? 
A.  Three  or  four  weeks  ago. 

Q.  Up  to  this  time  you  have  not  received  your  license  ? 
A.  No  license. 

Q.  But  you  have  complied  with  every  requirement  of  the 
law  this  year  ? 

A.  Everything  the  law  required  of  me. 

Q.  And  you  are  now  doing  business  without  a  license? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Andrew  J.  Baker,  being  duly  affirmed,  according  to  law, 
testified  as  follows : 

Examined  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  518  South  Tenth  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 
A.  Twenty-five  years  in  that  house. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  a  license  for  1885  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  Some  time  during  the  month  of  January. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  ? 
A.  In  cash. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  pay  ? 
A.  Major  Linton. 


68 


Q.  When  did  you  obtain  the  license  ? 

A.  Some  time  during  the  month  of  December. 

Q.  Nearly  a  year  afterwards  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you,  in  the  meantime,  comply  with  the  law  requiring 
a  bond  and  an  insurance  policy  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  that  ? 

A.  So  far  as  the  policy  of  insurance  is  concerned  I  differ 
with  Ma;jor  Linton,  because  I  do  not  believe  it  to  be  the  right 
of  the  Mayor  to  demand  that  I  should  assign  my  policy  of 
insurance  to  him,  I  had  read  the  law  or  the  ordinance,  and 
as  I  read  the  law  it  does  not  require  that  the  policy  should  be 
assigned  to  the  Mayor.  That  is  as  I  understand  it,  and  I 
think  I  understand  something  about  it. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  ? 

A.  I  demurred  to  transfer  or  assign  the  policy  of  insurance. 
And  another  thing,  they  had  lost  my  policy,  which  had  been 
deposited  there  for  a  number  of  years,  and  which  I  kept  always 
renewed.  My  policy  was  deposited,  probably,  with  Mayor 
Stokley,  and  it  was  always  there  and  always  kept  alive. 

Q.  What  did  you  finally  do  ? 

A.  Finally,  I  agreed  that  I  would  have  my  policy  made  to 
him,  as  Mayor  of  the  City. 

Q.  Then  you  conceded  eventually  in  the  demand  he  had 
made  ? 

A.  I  acquiesced  in  the  demand. 

Q.  When? 

A.  Some  time  during  January,  or  perhaps  in  February. 

Q.  Soon  after  you  had  paid  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  the  policy  you  had  there  was  lost  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  had  to  get  a  new  one. 


69 


Q .  When  was  it  lost  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  it  was  lost  within  the  year  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  it  was  lost  during  .Mayor 
Smith's  administration  or  during  a  previous  one  ? 

A.  I  don't  suppose  it  was,  because  it  was  there  probably 
ten  years  or  more  in  the  office.  The  Mayor's  Clerk  lost  it, 
but  whether  it  was  Stokley's  or  Fox's  I  don't  know. 

Q.  When  did  you  find  it  out  ? 

A.  Not  till  1885,  when  I  went  to  Major  Linton  and  wanted 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Well,  you  furnished  another  one  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  Did  you  pay  money  this  year  ? 

A.  I  paid  a  check  this  year. 

Q.  Please  produce  it  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 
By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Have  you  your  license  for  last  year  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 
Q.  Please  produce  both  your  licenses  ? 
A.  I  cannot  for  this  year ;  I  have  not  got  it. 
Q.  This  check  (indicating  a  check)  is  altered,  I  see.  Did 
you  do  that  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  attempted  to  write  "City  Treasurer,"  as  I 
had  always  been  in  the  habit  of  doing.  You  see  that  I  com- 
menced that  word. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  At  whose  suggestion  did  you  do  it  in  this  way  ? 
A.  At  Major  Linton's. 


70 


Q.  You  say  you  were  beginning  to  write  City,"  and  then 
he  said  "  hold  on." 

A.  No.  I  don't  know  what  were  his  words.  I  said  that  I 
had  always  drawn  checks  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer. 

Q.  What  did  Major  Linton  say  ? 

A.  That  the  license  was  payable  to  the  order  of  the  Mayor, 
and  I  altered  it  to  the  order  of  the  Mayor     I  altered  that 
word  "  City"  into  the  word  "William."    I  did  it  myself. 
By  Mr.  Roberts,  (Chairman.) 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  this  year,  requiring  a 
bond  and  a  policy  of  insurance  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know.  My  bondsman  told  me  that  he  had 
signed  the  bond.    I  did  not  see  him  do  it. 

Q.  When  did  he  do  it  ? 

A.  A  few  days  after  the  date  of  the  check — 6  or  7  days  or^ 
probably  3  or  4  days. 

Q.  You  have  not  got  a  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  I  am  satisfied  that  he  signed  it. 

Q.  You  have  not  got  a  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  Why,  I  am  waiting  for  it. 

Q.  Have  you  asked  for  it  ? 

A.  No  sir.  Not  this  year.  I  did  demand  it  last  year,  and 
Major  Linton  told  me  it  was  not  filled  up  yet,  but  that  it  was 
all  right,  and  that  he  would  send  it  in  a  few  days,  and  I  sup- 
posed the  same  course  would  be  pursued  this  year,  and  as  the 
few  days  run  on  to  December,  I  thought  I  would  get  it  then. 
By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  You  say  that  in  1885  a  new  policy  was  procured  ? 

A.  Yes  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  procure  it  ? 
A.  Yes  sir. 

Q.  Did  Major  Linton  ask  to  get  it  for  you  ? 

A.  No.  sir.  I  had  a  duplicate  filled  up  for  the  lost  policy. 
I  believe  that  is  what  you  call  it.  They  filled  out  another 
policy  for  me. 


71 


Q.  And  this  year  you  have  tendered  your  money  and  your 
bond  ? 

A.  And  my  polic}^  of  insurance  was  in  force  at  the  time. 
Q.  Was  it  renewed  when  it  expired  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  no  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  No,  sir, — that  is,  I  have  not  got  the  piece  of  paper. 
The  license  is  in  my  possession. 

Q.  Is  there  any  purpose  of  the  Police  Department  which 
could  be  served  by  withholding  your  license  ? 

A.  I  cannot  see  any. 

Q.  Would  it  give  the  Mayor  any  greater  power  to  enforce 
the  lawthan  what  he  now  has  in  suits  against  the  pawnbrokers  ? 

A.  Not  as  I  understand  the  law,  and  I  think  I  understand 
it? 

Q.  Why  do  you  say  that  ? 

A.  Because  I  had  a  hand  in  making  it,  and  I  voted  for  its 
adoption,  and  I  know  what  it  is  about. 

Q.  How  do  you  understand  it  ? 

A.  That  the  applicant  for  a  license  must  make  an  applica- 
tion to  the  Mayor,  must  tender  his  money  and  present  his 
surety,  and  sign  his  bond,  and  present  a  live  policy  of  insur- 
ance to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  All  at  the  same  time  ? 

A.  Strictly,  I  would  say  all  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  All  as  parts  of  the  same  transaction  ? 

A.  I  understand  it  to  be  customary,  for  the  convenience  of 
•people, — for  instance,  for  the  convenience  of  a  bondsman,  to 
say,  "  Why,  your  bondsman  can  come  to-morrow."  I  know 
how  it  has  been  with  my  bondsman.  It  may  be  inconvenient 
for  him  to  come  on  a  certain  day.  Sometimes  a  bondsman 
may  be  in  the  immediate  neighborhood  of  the  Mayor's  office, 
and  sometimes  he  may  be  at  a  distance.  It  is  just  as  it 
happens. 


72 


Q.  But  your  understanding  of  the  requirements  of  the 
ordinance  is  that  when  the  money  has  been  paid,  and  the  bond 
executed,  and  the  policy  delivered,  that  then  the  party  is  en- 
titled to  his  license  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Did  you  make  a  demand  on  the  Mayor,  or  on  Major 
Linton,  last  year  ? 

A.  On  Major  Linton. 

Q.  You  did  not  see  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 


William  D.  Kendrick,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law, 
testified,  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  Paw^nbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  209  South  Eighth  street. 

Q.  How^  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.  About  six  years  there. 

Q.  Did  you  have  a  license  last  year  there  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  In  the  month  of  January. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  pay  ? 

A.  Major  Linton. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  him  ? 

A.  In  a  check. 

Q.  Have  you  got  the  check  ? 

A.  I  have. 


73 

Q.  Please  produce  it  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

A.  With  your  permission  I  will  state  right  here  to  the  Com- 
mittee that  I  have  a  brother  in  the  business.  We  have  four 
places  between  us.  He  has  three  and  I  have  one.  You  will 
find  that  the  checks  call  for  $400,  for  the  four  places,  in  his 
name. 

Q.  I  notice  Kendrick  here  four  times  (referring  to  the 
checks),  for  Carver  W.  Reed  &  Co.  Do  you  represent  the 
entire  four  concerns  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  the  money  in  January,  1885  ? 
A.  I  think  the  check  will  show. 

Q.  The  check  is  blank  in  the  date. 

A.  Yes  ?  I  now  notice  it  is  blank  (referring  to  check). 
W^e  omitted  to  put  in  the  date. 

(The  witness  here  refers  to  the  stubs  of  his  check  book,  but 
is  unable  to  testify  to  the  date  when  the  money  was  paid,  in 
January,  1885.) 

Q.  When  did  you  get  your  license  in  1885  ? 
A.  In  December. 

Q.  Coverinsj  all  four  places  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  we  have  one  for  each  place. 

Q.  Did  you  get  them  in  December  for  each  of  the  four 
places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  in  the  meantime  with  the  law  requiring 
the  insurance  policy  and  the  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  that  ? 

A.  In  the  month  of  January.    There  are  policies  that  re- 
main there  and  we  renew  them  from  time  to  time.  Sometimes 
they  may  run  out  in  the  middle  of  the  year ;  for  instance,  we 
10 


74 


have  got  one  there  now  which  will  run  out  in  the  middle  of  the^ 
year,  which  we  have  got  to  renew. 

Q.  That  is,  you  wait  until  they  expire,  and  then  you  renew 
them  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  that  this  year  you  paid  a  check  for  the  four 
places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  your  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  We  have  not  got  it  yet. 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  requiring  a  policy  and 
bond  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  that  ? 

A.  I  filed  the  bond  when  I  paid  the  check,  and  I  renewed 
my  policy  of  insurance  within  a  couple  of  months. 
Q.  Why  have  you  not  got  your  license  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 
Q.  Have  you  asked  for  it  ? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  ask  ? 

A.  Well,  there  was  a  young  man  there — it  was  a  new  face 
to  me.  He  was  quite  a  young  man.  He  seemed  to  be  attend- 
ing to  Major  Linton's  business.  The  Major  was  away  and  the 
Mayor  was  away.  The  young  man  said  we  would  get  it  in  a 
few  days. 

Q.  Did  you  know  who  the  young  man  was  ? 
A.  I  don't  know.    It  was  a  new  face. 

Q.  Was  he  the  only  person  there  at  tlie  time  ? 

A.  No.  There  were  others  there.  They  were  writing  at 
the  time,  and  there  were  a  lot  of  insurance  policies  lying  there^ 
and  I  saw  that  mine  was  there. 

Q.  Then  you  asked  for  your  license  but  have  not  received  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


75 


By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  You  feel  that  you  are  entitled  to  the  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  do. 

Q.  You  think  that  your  protection  in  business  demands  that 
it  should  be  in  your  possession  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Isaac  P.  Hunt^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  What  business  are  you  in  ? 
A.  I  am  a  pawnbroker. 
Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 
A.  1538  South  street. 
Q.  Did  you  take  out  a  license  last  year  ? 
A.  I  did. 
.   Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 
A.  On  January  5th,  1885. 
Q.  How  did  you  pay  ? 
A.  By  check. 
Q.  Please  produce  it  ? 
(The  witness  here  produces  check.) 
Q.  When  did  you  obtain  your  license  ? 
A.  Between  Christmas  and  New  Years. 
Q.  Of  last  year? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  with  the  law  in  regard  to  the  bond  and 
the  policy  of  insurance  ? 

A.  At  the  time  I  gave  the  check  in  I  filed  my  bond.  I 
deposited  a  policy  of  insurance  which  run  out  in  the  April 
following,  and  I  transferred  it  to  the  Mayor. 


76 

Q.  Did  you  pay  this  year? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  by  check,  on  January  13th. 
Q.  Have  you  obtained  a  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  it? 
A.  About  ten  days  ago. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  regarding  the  bond 
and  policy? 

A.  I  filed  my  bond  at  the  time  I  drew  the  check  in  1886. 
I  did  not  file  any  policy  until  this  day  two  weeks  ago. 


Adolph  Roaenbauon,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law",  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  A  pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  your  place? 

A.  At  1200  North  Second  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.  Six  or  seven  years. 

Q.  Did  you  take  out  a  license  in  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  On  the  19th  of  January. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay — in  cash  or  by  check  ? 

A.  By  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

A.  I  have  not  got  it  with  me ;  I  could  not  find  it,  but  see 
by  the  stub  that  it  was  on  the  19th  of  January. 
Q.  You  did  not  preserve  it  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  ;  I  have  not  found  it. 


77 

Q.  When  did  you  obtain  the  license  ? 
A.  Some  time  in  December,  I  believe. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  with  the  law,  in  the  meantime,  with  re- 
gard to  the  policy  of  insurance  and  bond  ? 
A.  Everything  was  complied  with. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  the  present  year  ? 
A.  I  paid  on  January  28th. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q.  I  see  you  have  drawn  this  (referring  to  the  check)  to  the 
order  of  the  Mayor  for  the  license.    Is  that  the  usual  way  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  comply  with  the  law  regarding  the  bond 
and  policy  ? 

A.  With  everything  right  away. 
Q.  In  January  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  the  bond  was  completed  right  away,  but  the 
insurance  run  out  in  March,  and  I  renewed  it  again. 

Q.  Have  you  obtained  a  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Why  have  you  not  obtained  a  license  for  this  year  ? 

A.  That  is  more  than  I  can  answer. 

Q.  Have  you  asked  for  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  generally  send  them  to  us ;  that  is  the 
reason  we  do  not  ask  them  for  them. 

Q.  Y'^ou  are  waiting  for  them  now  to  send  it  to  you  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  in  all  respects  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  aliy  more  at  the  Mayor's  office  than  one 
hundred  dollars  ? 

A.  Just  a  little  Christmas  present. 


78 


Q.  Did  they  ask  for  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  It  has  always  been  the  custom  under  previous  Mayors  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  just  the  same  thing. 


Abraham  Levy^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  Wliat  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  agent  for  Mrs.  Adelaide  Levy. 

Q.  What  is  her  business  ? 

A.  A  pawnbroker. 

Q.  Where  is  her  place  ? 

A.  No.  1400  North  Second  street.    She  has  two  places. 
Q.  Where  is  her  other  place  ? 
A.  1808  Market  street. 

Q.  Did  you  take  out  a  license  for  Mrs.  Levy  in  1885  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  for  it  ? 

A.  Between  the  2d  and  4th  of  January. 

Q.  Who  did  you  pay  ? 

A.  Major  Linton. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  ? 

A.  In  cash. 

Q.  When  did  you  get  the  licenses  ? 
A.  I  guess,  about  December. 

Q.  Are  you  replying  now  for  both  places  of  business  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  one  place  was  only  commenced  in  1886. 

Q.  What  place  are  you  speaking  for  ? 
A.  For  North  Second  street. 


79 

•Q.  For  1885? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  obtain  the  license  ? 
A.  In  December. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  with  the  law  in  the  meantime,  regarding 
the  policy  and  the  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  did  not  get  the  license  until  December  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  pay  this  year  ? 
A.  On  the  fourth  day  of  January. 

Q.  For  both  places  ? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  obtained  a  license  ? 
A.  Not  yet. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  ? 
A.  In  cash. 

Q.  How  much  cash  ? 
A.  Two  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  One  hundred  dollars  for  each  place  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  regarding  policy  and  a 
bond  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — at  present  we  have. 

Q.  Why  do  you  qualify  your  answer  ? 
A.  Because,  up  to  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  August  we  had 
not  complied  according  to  the  requirements. 

Q.  In  both  cases,  or  only  one  ? 
A.  In  both  cases. 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  entirely  comply  until  some  time  in 
August  ? 

A.  On  the  24th. 


80 


Q.  But  you  have  not  received  a  license  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ask  for  it  ? 

A.  I  asked  for  it  and  they  told  me  it  would  be  sent  by  mail. 

Q.  And  you  are  now  waiting  for  It  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  In  what  had  you  not  complied  ? 

A.  In  not  putting  in  the  policy  and  fihng  the  bond. 

Q.  You  had  not  given  a  bond  at  all  ? 

A.  I  was  under  the  impression  that  the  gentleman  who 
generally  went  on  the  bond  had  signed  it,  but  I  received  a 
notice  from  Major  Linton  that  the  bond  had  not  been  signed. 

Q.  Previous  to  that  you  thought  it  had  been  ? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  thereupon  had  it  signed  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  policy  of  insurance — was  that  all  right  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  was  that  made  right  ? 

A.  Major  Linton  had  a  policy  of  insurance  on  the  28th  of 
May,  and  I  withdrew  it  for  the  purpose  of  having  it  renewed. 
The  insurance  agent  was  to  return  it  to  Major  Linton,  but  he 
returned  it  to  the  office. 

Q.  The  money  was  paid  in  January  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  are  now  Avaiting  for  your  license  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Did  you  ever  make  a  demand  on  the  Mayor  for  your 
license  ? 

A.  Not  on  the  Mayor  ? 


81 


Q.  You  renewed  your  insurance  in  August  ? 
A.  No.    In  May. 

Q.  But  they  never  received  any  notice  of  it  until  August 
24th? 

A.  No,  sir. 


Isaac  P.  Hunt,  recalled: 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Have  these  checks  (referring  to  checks  which  had  been 
produced  by  the  witness)  been  altered  in  any  way  since  drawn 
or  signed  by  you  ? 

A.  That  one  is  not  (indicating  check). 

Q.  Has  this  one  (indicating  check)  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    I  cannot  see  any  alteration. 

Q.  But,  did  you  do  this  ?  (indicating)  was  this  word  "  Mayor" 
written  in  that  way  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  did  it  at  the  suggestion  of  Major  Linton. 
I  always  drew  them  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  but 
Major  Linton  asked  me  last  year  and  this  year  to  draw  them 
to  Wm.  B.  Smith  or  order. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Did  you  object  to  doing  it? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  just  took  a  blank  check  in  my  pocket,  and 
when  he  asked  me  to  draw  it  in  that  way  I  did  so.  I  had  no 
idea  of  his  reason  why  he  asked  me. 

At  this  point,  upon  motion  of  Mr.  Clay,  the  Committee 
takes  a  recess  for  one  hour — until  2  o'clock  P.  M. 
11 


82 


After  Recess. 

The  Committee  re-assembles  at  2  o'clock  P.  M. 

After  calling  it  to  order,  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  asks  Mr. 
Johnson,  the  Messenger  of  the  Committee,  the  following 
questions  : 

Q.  Did  you  serve  H.  A.  Jones  with  a  subpoena? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  so  ? 

A.  At  4  o'clock  yesterday  afternoon. 

Q.  Whereabouts  ? 

A.  At  his  place  of  business. 

Q.  And  did  you  serve  A.  Garman  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When? 

A.  This  morning,  at  five  minutes  of  ten  o'clock. 
Q.  Where  did  you  find  him  ? 

A.  At  his  place  of  business,  at  Sixth  and  Vine  streets. 

Mr.  Clay :  I  move  that  the  messenger  be  ordered  to  pro- 
ceed to  the  place  of  business  of  Mr.  Garman,  and  if  he  can 
find  him  there,  to  take  him  into  custody,  and  bring  him  before 
the  Committee. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  :  The  Chair  understands  that  we 
will  have  to  go  to  court  about  this  matter,  and  the  City  So- 
licitor will  be  the  proper  person  to  take  charge  of  these  two 
cases. 

Mr.  Warwick  :  The  City  Solicitor,  who  is  present  with  the 
Committee,  here  requests  that  Mr.  Johnson,  the  messenger  of 
the  Committee,  shall  be  sworn.  Upon  Mr.  Johnson  being 
sworn,  he  is  subjected  to  the  following  examination  by  Mr. 
Warwick  : 

Q.  Did  you  serve  H.  A.  Jones,  at  Third  and  Gaskill  streets, 
with  a  subpoena  this  morning  ? 
A.  Yesterday  afternoon. 


83 

Q.  At  what  time  ? 

A.  About  four  o'clock,  or  a  little  after. 

Q.  Did  you  serve  him  personally  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  ? 

A.  That  he  would  be  here. 

Q.  Is  he  here  now  ? 

A.  I  don't  see  him. 

(The  name  of  H.  A.  Jones  is  here  called  in  a  loud  voice  by 
Mr.  Warwick,  there  being  no  response.) 

Mr.  Warwick  :  Does  any  one  here  know  him  ? 

Mr.  Reinstine :  I  know  him. 

Mr.  Warwick  :  Is  he  here  ? 

Mr.  Reinstein  :  He  is  not  here. 

(Mr.  Warwick  here  calls  in  a  loud  voice  the  name  of  A. 
Garman.    There  is  no  response.) 

Mr.  Bardsley :  I  now  move  that  the  City  Solicitor  take 
legal  steps  to  compel  the  attendance  of  those  witnesses  who 
have  been  subpoenaed,  but  who  have  not  responded. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Bardsley. 

It  is  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman):  That  exhausts  our  list  of  wit- 
nesses who  have  been  subpoenaed. 

Mr.  Clay  :  I  now  move  that  the  Committee  now  adjourn  to 
the  other  room  to  go  into  executive  session. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay. 
It  is  agreed  to. 


84 

Mr.  Brightly  (the  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith):  Does  that 
end  the  public  session  for  to-day? 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Brightly :  "Will  you  announce  when  the  next  public 
session  will  be  held  ? 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  It  will  be  announced  after  it  has 
been  determined  by  the  Committee. 

The  Committee  at  this  point  retire  for  the  purpose  of 
going  into  executive  session. 


SECOND  DAY. 


SELECT  COUNCIL  CHAMBER. 


Philadelphia,  September  6,  1886. 

The  Committee  re-assembled  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.,  this  day, 
in  this  Chamber  of  Select  Council,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present : — Mr.  Roberts  in  the  Chair ;  Mr.  Eckstein,  Clerk, 
and  the  following  members  of  the  Committee — Messrs.  Ed- 
wards, Bardsley,  Iseminger,  Claridge,  Clay,  Reinstine,  and 
Lawrence,  President  of  Common  Council ;  of  Counsel — Mr. 
Warwick,  the  City  Solicitor ;  Messrs  Earle,  Brightly,  Ruddi- 
man,  and  White,  as  representing  the  Mayor. 

Continuation  of  Testimony. 

Henry  A.  Jones,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law  testi- 
fied as  follows : 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman.) 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  in  the  pawnbroking  business. 

Q.  In  what  locality  ? 

A.  At  Third  and  Gaskell  streets. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.  About  twenty-five  years. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  payment  in  '85  for  a  license  ? 
A.  I  did. 

(85) 


86 

Q.  When? 

A.  On  January  7th. 

Q.  Did  you  make  it  by  check,  or  in  money  ? 
A.  By  check. 

Q.  Will  you  pleaee  produce  the  check  ? 
(The  witness  here  produces  a  check.) 
Q.  Was  this  all  you  paid  ? 
(Referring  to  check.) 
A.  At  that  time. 

Q.  When  did  you  obtain  your  license  for  this  ? 
A.  The  latter  part  of  December. 

Q.  Did  you  comply  with  the  law  regarding  the  bond  or  the 
security  in  the  meantime  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  that  ? 

A.  I  paid  the  insurance  in  February. 

Q.  Please  produce  your  license  for  '85  ? 

(Witness  here  searches  among  a  number  of  papers  which 
he  produces  from  his  pocket.) 

A.  I  believe  that  I  have  left  it  at  home ;  but  I  have  got  it. 

Q.  Well,  for  this  year,  '86  ;  did  you  pay  for  this  year? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  by  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  it. 

(Witness  here  produces  a  check.) 

Q.  When  did  you  get  a  license  for  this  year  ? 
A.  I  have  not  got  any. 

Q.  Why  have  you  not  received  any  ? 
A.  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  Have  you  complied  with  the  law  ? 
A.  I  believe  I  have. 


87 


Q.  Why  do  you  say  that  ?  Has  it  ever  been  disputed  by 
any  one  ? 

A.  Not  by  any  one  ;  only  I  seen  my  name  in  the  paper. 
Q.  Have  you  been  asked  to  comply  with  the  law  regarding 
the  insurance  policy  and  bond  ? 
A.  No. 

Q.  You  think  that  you  have  complied  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Did  you  make  a  demand  for  your  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  never  bothered  about  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir;  I  did  not. 
Q.  You  never  made  any  demand? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  paid  your  insurance  and  all  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  it  didn't  run  out  or  expire  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


A.  Garman^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified  as 
follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 
Q.  Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 
A.  At  Sixth  and  Race  streets. 

Q.  You  failed  to  appear  before  this  Committee  on  Saturday  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  was  here ;  but  I  was  suffering  from  an  at- 
tack of  dysentery  and  I  was  obliged  to  go  away. 

Q.  Are  you  in  business  there  on  your  own  account  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  an  interest  in  Harvey  and  McGarry's 
business. 


88 

Q.  I  believe  Mr.  McGarry  testified  in  regard  to  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  know  nothing  beyond  what  he  knows  ? 
A.  Nothing  at  all.    I  never  transacted  any  portion  of  that 
business. 


Abraham  J.  McGarry^  re-called. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  You  placed  on  Saturday  in  the  hands  of  the  Committee 
only  five  checks ;  but  if  you  paid  for  all,  it  seems  to  me  there 
should  have  been  six  ;  have  you  another  one  ? 

A.  No,  sir.;  I  will  explain  it.  I  placed  two  checks  in  the 
hands  of  the  Committee  for  the  office  at  Sixth  and  Race  streets, 
for  the  office  of  Harvey  &  McGarry,  one  for  1885  and  one  for 
1886;  and  one  for  1885  and  one  for  1886  for  the  office  at 
Fifth  and  Vine  streets  ;  and  another  one  which  makes  up  the 
five  which  was  not  for  our  business,  in  which  we  had  no  con- 
cern— one  check  that  I  loaned  to  Mr.  Harvey  for  license  pur- 
poses on  the  6th  of  January  last. 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  Why  did  you  loan  that  ? 

A.  The  reason  was  because  he  had  not  sufficient  money  in 
cash  to  pay  his  license,  but  instead  of  drawing  his  check  to 
the  order  of  Mr.  Harvey,  I  simply  drew  it  as  if  it  was  my 
own  and  passed  it  over  to  Mr.  Harvey. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  The  checks  which  you  drew  in  1885  have  been  changed 
on  their  face  ? 

A.  They  are  precisely  in  the  condition  in  which  I  handed 
them  to  you. 


89 


Q.  Cannot  you  tell  the  Committee  how  they  came  to  be 
altered — why  the  change  was  made  in  the  name,  "William  B. 
Smith,  Treasurer,"  instead  of  City  Treasurer?  Why  did  you 
make  your  checks  in  1886  payable  to  the  order  of  the  City 
Treasurer  ? 

A.  It  has  always  been  my  habit.  I  want  to  say  this,  that 
I  am  reported  in  most  of  the  newspapers  as  having,  according 
to  the  reading  of  the  testimony  ;  that  is,  it  would  appear  that 
I  had  a  dfficulty  with  the  Police  Department.  Such  has  not 
been  the  case.  It  would  appear  that  I  had  had  difficulty,  or 
had  been  at  loggerheads  with  the  police  force.  I  w^ant  to  say 
that  such  is  not  the  case.  My  relations  with  the  police  force 
and  with  the  present  Detective  Department  and  with  the  po- 
licemen have  been  most  friendly.  They  are  not  afraid  of  me 
and  I  am  not  afraid  of  them.  I  have  never  come  into  contact 
— I  want  to  say  this — with  a  more  gentlemanly  man  than  the 
present  Chief  of  Police. 

By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  When  I  asked  you  on  Saturday  last  whether  you  had 
complained  about  the  alterations  of  the  canceled  chacks  you 
said,  no — that  you  thought  they  would  be  a  good  thing  to 
keep  ? 

A.  That  was  about  one  check — this  one  (indicating  check) 
for  '85.  I  will  say  that  I  think  it  is  a  good  thing  to  keep 
checks  always.  I  have  about  a  peck  of  them.  I  think  that 
they  may  come  in  good  as  vouchers  where  you  have  no  receipt 
for  the  payment  of  money. 

Q.  Didn't  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  one  of  1886 — 
.that  you  held  that  in  he  way  of  a  threat  ? 

A.  By  no  means.  It  is  a  habit  of  mine  which  I  have 
always  pursued.  I  knew  that  the  department  of  his  Honor 
the  Mayor  was  perfectly  good  for  my  .$100. 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  You  wanted  to  keep  it  for  self-protection  ? 
A.  Undoubtedly. 
12 


90 


By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  I  do  not  understand  what  you  mean  by  self-protection  ? 

A.  I  will  explain  it.  A  pledger  possibly  might  come  to  my 
office  and  assert  I  had  no  ^icense,  and  a  demand  might  be 
made  to  see  it.  Of  course,  nobody  has  a  right  to  make  a  de- 
mand to  see  it ;  but  if  there  was  any  doubt  about  it  I  could 
refer  them  to  the  Mayor's  office.  If  he  got  no  satisfaction 
there,  the  next  thing  would  be  to  bring  a  suit  against  me  for 
doing  business  without  a  license,  and  then  would  be  the  time 
to  produce  my  check  as  evidence. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  this  :  If  you  made  your  check 
payable  to  William  B.  Smith,  or  order,  why  it  would  not  have 
been  the  same  protection  as  in  the  other  way  ? 

A.  Well,  it  never  occurred  to  me  to  make  it  out  in  that 
way.  It  had  been  my  habit  of  twenty  years  to  make  it  to  the 
City  Treasurer. 

Q.  Was  that  check  altered  in  your  presence  at  the  Mayor's 
Office,  or  by  the  Mayor's  secretary  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Would  you  have  permitted  a  change  to  be  made  by  the 
Mayor's  secretary,  or  would  you  have  permitted  a  change  to 
be-  made  if  the  Mayor's  secretary  had  asked  you  ? 

A.  I  think  I  would  have  objected  to  their  making  an  altera- 
tion. 

By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  Then  why  did  not  you  object  after  receiving  these  checks 
from  the  bank ;  after  they  were  canceled,  and  not  submit  to  itj 
again  ? 

A.  Really,  it  was  no  affair  of  mine ;  I  did  not  believe  there 
was  any  danger  of  my  losing  my  one  hundred  dollars ;  I  had 
no  doubt  about  jt  that  Mayor  Smith  was  desirous  of  using  the 
one  hundred  dollars. 


91 


Q.  You  knew  that  this  was  a  violation  of  the  Law — the 
alteration  of  a  check  ? 

A.  Pardon  me  ;  I  did  not  know  it ;  I  thought  so. 

Q.  But  you  never  complained  about  it ;  you  still  did  the 
same  thing  with  the  same  object,  w^hich  you  claim  was  for  your 
protection.  I  want  to  know  whether  that  protection  was  in 
the  nature  of  a  threat  ? 

A.  I  will  explain  that  matter  a  little  more  definitely. 
During  a  former  administration  there  was  a  police  officer  in 
high  authority  who  was  appointed  a  lieutenant,  and  in  a  short 
time  a  captain.  I  had  received  a  deposit  of  a  small  lot  amount- 
ing to  $1.50,  and  we  subsequently  had  a  notice  about  those 
things,  and  we  overlooked  the  little  lot.  It  had  been  stolen. 
We  had  overlooked  a  small  article  which  was  taken  under  an 
advance  amounting  to  J1.50,  and  this  gentleman,  in  the  good- 
ness of  his  heart,  thought  that  he  would  get  a  warrant  and 
have  me  bound  over  for  trial,  and  there  was  a  bill  before  the 
grand  jury.  It  was  all  correct,  except  that  we  had  overlooked 
to  give  him  a  gossamer  to  the  value  of  one  dollar.  Of  course 
I  didn't  stand  a  trial  for  a  dollar.  Therefore,  I  say,  if  a  cap- 
tain or  a  lieutenant  of  police,  or  any  other  man  under  such 
circumstances  were  to  do  such  a  thing  I  would  certainly  compel 
him  to  Avithdraw  it  because  it  was  a  most  unjust  charge.  I 
will  give  you  the  name  of  this  late  lieutenant  of  police,  and  I 
will  say  that  I  owe  to  Mayor  Smith  the  most  lasting  gratitude, 
because  he  was  the  first  man  that  he  bounced — the  late  Cap- 
tain Howell. 

Mr.  Roberts,  the  Chairman.  I  have  had  in  my  possession 
for  some  days  a  communication  which  reached  me  through 
the  President  of  Common  Council — a  sealed  communication. 
It  .was  opened  by  authority  of  the  Committee  of  which  I  have 
the  honor  to  be  Chairman.  As  I  have  said,  it  came  to  me 
through  the  President  of  Common  Council. 

Mr.  Clay  :  I  suggest  that  the  Clerk  of  the  Committee  should 
now  read  it  in  order  that  it  may  become  public  property. 


92 


(Mr.  Eckstein,  the  Clerk  of  the  Committee,  here  read  the 
communication  referred  to  by  the  Chairman,  as  follows :) 

"  President  Lawrence  will  deliver  this  sealed  envelope  to  the 
Chairman  of  any  Committee  that  may  be  charged  with  the  in- 
vestigation of  charges  against  Mayor  Smith.  If  no  such 
charge  shall  be  given  to  a  committee  on  September  2,  1886, 
please  return  this  envelope  to 

A.  K.  McCLURE. 

Confidential. 

Note  to  Chairman  of  Committee — The  names  of  these  wit- 
nesses should  be  withheld  from  all  but  the  members  of  the 
Committee  and  the  officer  serving  the  subpoenas,  until  they 
appear  to  testify^  and  those  marked  with  a  f  in  pencil  marks 
should  be  called  first  in  the  order  in  which  their  names  appear 
on  the  list.  I  have  given  the  names  of  many  to  protect  the 
few  who  are  important  witnesses.  Mr.  McGarry  has  three 
forged  checks  and  Mr.  Garman  has  two.  Direct  all  to  pro- 
duce all  checks  in  their  possession  for  both  1885  and  1886. 

A.  K.  McCLURE. 

1.  Jacob  Myers,  108  South  Eighth  street, 
f  2.  Solomon  L.  Linse,  626  South  street. 

3.  Wm.  D.  Kendrick,  209  South  Eighth  Street. 

4.  Geo.  W.  Kendrick,  601  South  Third  street. 

5.  Geo.  W.  Kendrick,  for  Carver  W.  Reed  6:  Co.,  1644 

Market  street. 

6.  Geo.  W.  Kendrick,  for  Carver  W.  Reed  k  Co.,  1514 

Market  street. 
t7.  A.  J.  McGarry,  N.  E.  cor.  Fifth  and  Vine  streets. 
t8.  Joseph  Mekeal,  512  South  Sixth  street. 

9.  H.  A.  Jones,  Third  and  Gaskill  streets. 
10.  A.  J.  Baker,  518  South  Tenth  street, 
fll.  Jacob  Rosenthal,  1813  South  street. 
12.  Philip  Hunt  &  Son,  1538  South  street. 


93 


18.  Adolph  Rosenbaum,  1200  North  Second  street. 

14.  Abram  Levy,  for  Adelaide  Levy,  1808  Market  street. 

15.  Abram  Levy,  for  Adelaide  Levy,  1400  North  Second 

street. 

tl6.  Moses  P.  Hamberg,  1209  North  Twelfth  street. 

17.  Dr.  Judah  Isaacs,  for  Josephine  Isaacs,  1724  Ridge 

avenue. 

18.  Isaac  Nathans,  730  Race  street. 

19.  Isaac  Nathans,  Third  and  Spruce  streets. 

20.  Samuel  Nathans,  247  North  Ninth  street. 

21.  John  Rettew,  28  North  Eleventh  street. 

t22.  Daniel  Rosenthal,  1127  Poplar  street.    Mayor  disputes 
this  payment. 

23.  Oscar  Wilson,  N.  E.  cor.  Eleventh  and  Sansom  streets. 

24.  Ellis  Silberstein,  123  North  Ninth  street. 
t25.  A.  Garman,  157  North  Sixth  street. 


Robert  31.  Scott,  being  duly  affirmed  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  Chairman  : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  the  general  bookeeper  of  the  Fidelity  Trust  Com- 
pany, in  charge  of  the  banking  department. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  ? 

A.  To  examine  the  accounts  and  make  general  settle- 
ments, &c. 

Q.  You  have  charge  of  all  the  accounts  in  the  institution — 
all  the  ledger  accounts  ? 

A.  That  is  totally,  I  do.  Each  one  has  its  bookkeeper.  I 
am  over  them,  and^they  refer  to  me  different  items,  &c. 

Q.  Have  you  particular  charge  of  Mr.  Smith's  account  ? 

A.  That  comes  under  me. 


94 


Q.  How  many  accounts  has  Mr.  Smith? 
A.  One. 

Q.  What  shape  is  it  in  ? 
A.  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer. 
Q.  How  long  has  he  had  that  account  in  that  shape? 
A.  Since  December  8,  1880. 
Q.  Did  he  ever  have  any  other  account  there  ? 
A.  He  had  an  account  as  Trustee  in  1880,  but  I  have  not 
looked  at  that  account. 
Q.  When  was  it  closed  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 
Q.  Is  it  closed  now  ? 
A.  It  is  closed  now. 

Q.  How  long  has  it  been  closed — about  two  or  three  years  ? 
A.  I  cannot  tell  that  without  referring  to  the  books.  We 
have  a  record  room  there,  and  they  are  now  in  the  record  room. 
Q.  "William  B.  Smith"  is  the  present  only  account? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  it  has  been  so  for  the  last  year  or  two  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  a  transcript  from  your  books  ? 
A.  I  have. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  transcript  from  the  books  of 
the  institution.) 

Q.  When  did  it  commence  ? 

A.  On  January  1,  1885,  and  is  up  to  the  present  time. 
Q.  That  is,  "William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer?" 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  strike  balances  at  regular  intervals  ? 
A.  We  do,  on  the  15th  of  every  month.    That  is,  on  our 
Ledger,  and  when  any  book  comes  in  we  rule  it  up. 
(The  witness  here  produces  a  paper,  as  follows :) 


95 


Willia?n  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  in  account  with  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 

DR.  CR. 


To  2  Checks. 


To  9 


Balance 


To  Checks. 
4 


$534  93 

175  00 
75  00 

176  30 
79  50 
58  85 

883  96 
820  64 
190  75 
103  63 
237  54 


2,929  10 

$6,265  20 

$285 

80 

224 

28 

40 

95 

1,624 

99 

1,673 

22 

109 

77 

1,600 

00 

1,224 

69 

1,825 

00 

5 

31 

98 

30 

75 

00 

122 

25 

75 

00 

500 

00 

13 

00 

100 

00 

50 

00 

586 

12 

1885 
Jan'y  1 


9 
14 

Feb.  4 


Feb'y  4 
4 
6 
7 
13 
13 
14 
17 
20 
21 
28 

Mar.  31 


By  Balance. 
Cash  


By  Balance.. 
Interest . 
Cash   


$865  20 
1,000  00 
500  00 
800  00 
1,100  00 
700  00 
300  00 
400  00 
300  00 
300  00 


$6,266 


$2, 


9  10 

9  27 
390  00 
1,437  41 
1,327  56 
3,245  90 
106  82 
600  00 
275  00 
700  00 
500  00 
1,815  82 


96 


William  B.  Smithy  Treasurer^  in  account  with  the  Fideliti/' 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 

DR.  CE. 


To  Check. 


Balance. 


To    Check , 


500  00 
21  45 
16  00 
75  00 
25  00 
20  00 
1,945  75 


12,836 


$1,100  00 

49  30 
800  00 
114  58 

18  50 

32  00 
377  80 
357  71 

25  00 

25  00 
100  00 
558  50 

78  14 
150  00 
387  53 
175  00 

20  82 
100  00 
100  00 
200  00 
375  00 

69  00 

50  00 
200  00 
500  00 


Mar.  31 
April  14 
May  11 
19 

June  9 
22 

30 

July  13 
16 

Aug,  5 


By  Balance 
Cash  


97 


William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  in  account  with  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 

CR.  DR. 


To  Checks 
« 

« 

To  3  Checks 
To  2  Checks 
To  Checks 

Balances  

To  Checks, 

« 

(( 

<( 
<i 

2  " 

13 


41  00 
40  00 
55  00 
250  00 
50  00 
40  00 
2,000  00 
500  00 
75  00 
250  50 
138  54 
193  54 
150  04 
50  00 
138  54 
25  00 
138  54 
84  00 
6,714  10 


$16,897  68 


$1,860  05 
25  00 
600  00 
25  00 
500  00 
600  00 
440  00 
1  50 
82  75 
700  00 
127  68 
30  00 
1.525  00 


Aug.  5 
6 

Sept.  5 
10 
11 
14 
15 
17 

Oct.  7 
Dec.  24 
24 
26 
31 


By  Balance.. 
Interest. 
Cash  


98 


William  B.  Smithy  Treasurer^  in  account  luith  the  Fiddi:^' 
Ins.^  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 


CR. 


DR. 


To  Checks. 
2     "  . 


3  " 


Balance  to  1886. 


To  2  Checks. 


Balance. 


$197  50 
636  20 
49  60 
83  75 
500  00 
2,000  00 
2,000  00 
20  00 
146  00 
18  00 
1,000  00 

124  00 
45  00 
28  50 
40  00 

296  10 
61  03 
2,123  60 

125  00 
2,287  12 


18,298  28 


$;2,363  10 

100  14 

1,000  00 

34  24 

250  00 

300  00 

200  00 

2,302  64 


$6,550  12 


1885 
Dec.  31 


1886 
Jan,  1 


By  Balance. 


By  Bal.  for  '85., 
Cash  


99 


William  B.  Smith,  Treamrer,  in-  account  wit/i  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 


DR. 


To  Checks. 


Balance , 


To  Checks. 
2      "  . 


mo  90 

1886 
Jan.  12 

300  00 

13 

1,000  00 

18 

700  00 

20 

400  00 

28 

10  25 

29 

47  53 

Feb.  2 

135  00 

5 

44  20 

12 

124  38 

47  25 

1,864  43 

$4,754  24 

500  00 

Feb.  12 

239  34 

12 

1,100  00 

13 

100  00 

23 

150  00 

24 

100  00 

March  5 

100  00 

6 

60  00 

18 

17  50 

20 

25  00 

25 

24  00 

27 

7,000  00 

31 

200  00 

31 

200  00 

April  29 

430  54 

187  42 

71  10 

125  00 

50  00 

CR. 


By  Balance 
Cash  


By  Balance 

Interest  

Cash  , 


100 


William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  in  account  with  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 


DR. 


CR. 


To  Checks 

Balance  

To  Checks 
2  " 
2  " 
« 

« 
CI 

Balance.. 


148  25 
25  00 
200  00 
332  11 


$11,385  26 


$100  00 
47  00 
350  00 
5,471  87 
169  75 
50  00 
377  80 
200  00 
100  00 
25  00 
150  00 
13  40 
250  50 
.37  92 
700  00 
164  25 
63  84 
39  75 
200  00 
3,500  00 
4,650  00 
1,529  85 
175  00 
1,500  00 
1,135  73 


April  29 
May  3 
5 
10 


June 


July  6 


By  Balance 
Cash  


101 


William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  in  account  with  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 

CR.  DR. 


To  Checks. 


2  " 


$700  00 
213  86 

432  40 
80  00 

600  00 

399  30 
17  50 

125  23 

100  00 
58  00 

600  00 
2,300  00 
5,970  00 

110  00 


1886. 
July  17 
20 
24 
28 
30 
2 
11 
20 
23 
24 


Aug. 


By  Balance. 
Cash  


Q.  On  the  left  hand  side  the  checks  are  charged  against 
him  and  on  the  right  hand  side  the  deposits  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  From  this  it  appears  that  on  February  4,  1885,  the 
balance  to  his  credit  was  $2,929.10  ? 
A.  That  is  correct. 
Q.  And  that  is  carried  forward  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  first  item  of  credit  under  date  of  February 
4th,  is  interest? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  $9.27  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  What  is  that  for  ? 

A.  Interest  on  the  average  balance  for  the  previous  six 
months. 


102 

Q.  At  what  rate  of  interest  ? 

A.  Two  per  cent. 

Q.  Was  that  by  agreement  ? 

A.  That  is  what  we  allow  on  our  deposits. 

Q.  Two  per  cent  ? 

A.  At  that  time. 

Q.  With  the  privilege  of  drawing  it  out  at  their  pleasure  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  pass  the  interest  to  their  credit  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  claim  is  subject  to  their  demand  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Just  as  if  they  put  in  that  much  more  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  other  words,  that  is  profit  to  them  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  the  next  balance  in  1885  appears  to  be  struck  on 
the  31st  of  March,  where  there  is  a  balance  of  $1,945.75  to  his 
credit  ? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

a 

Q.  So  it  goes  on  through  May  and  June  and  July,  and 
on  the  5th  of  August  you  struck  another  balance  showing 
$6,714.10  to  his  credit? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  And  on  the  same  day  you  pass  to  his  credit  interest  for 
$14.76? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  That  is  just  the  same  as  what  you  said  about  the  other 
interest  ? 

A.  Just  the  same  as  the  previous  interest. 

Q.  It  went  to  his  credit,  to  be  taken  out  by  him  at  his 
pleasure  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


103 


■Q.  That  is  what  he  makes  for  leaving  the  money  with  you  ? 
A.  That  is  what  he  makes — yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  you  go  on  through  August,  September  and  October, 
and  on  December  28th  you  struck  another  balance  showing  to 
his  credit  $2,287.12  ? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

Q,  Then  you  go  through  January  and  strike  another  balance 
on  January  12th,  where  there  is  $2,802.64. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  On  February  12th  you  strike  another  balance  showing 
$1,864.43? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  To  his  credit  on  February  12th  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  on  the  same  date  you  credit  him  with  $9.27  for  in- 
terest ?    That  is  the  same  as  what  you  said  before  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  reason  it  is  ruled  up  on  the  last  sheet  is 
because  the  book  has  not  been  turned  in  since.  I  have  the 
checks  in  the  office.    That  is  as  it  appears  on  our  ledger. 

Q.  This  account  comes  down  to  August  24th,  1886  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  On  the  deposit  side,  on  August  28th,  on  the  account  taken 
outside  it  shows  a  balance  on  August  28th  of  $629.44.  That 
is  down  to  the  present  time  ? 

A.  The  present  time. 

Q.  Are  these  the  dates  when  the  money  was  deposited  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir — these  are  the  dates. 

Q.  What  was  the  condition  of  his  account  on  the  1st  of  July 
of  this  year  ? 

(Witness  here  produces  a  paper.) 

A.  He  had  $2,354.06. 

Q.  What  did  he  have  on  the  15th  of  July  ? 

A.  He  had  $1,135.73. 


104 


Q.  And  on  the  16th  of  July  ? 

A.  The  same  amount.    It  was  not  touched  until  the  20th^ 

Q.  Now,  on  the  24th  of  July  what  did  he  have  ? 

A.  $754.47. 

Q.  And  on  the  28th  of  July  ? 

A.  $5.17. 

Q.  What  did  he  have  on  the  30th  of  July  ? 

A.  $27.67. 

Q.  On  the  30th  of  August  ? 

A.  It  was  overdrawn  $97.56. 

Q.  On  August  the  8th  it  was  overdrawn  what  ? 

A.  $97.56. 

Q.  And  on  the  2d  of  August  ? 

A.  His  balance  is  $52.44. 

Q.  And  then  it  is  overdrawn  what  ? 

A.  $97.56. 

Q.  Now,  on  the  3d  of  August  how  did  the  account  stand  ?' 

A.  Well,  he  had  that  balance. 

Q.  On  the  5th  of  August  how  was  it  ? 

A.  It  is  overdrawn  $47.56. 

Q.  On  the  7th  of  August? 

A.  The  same  amount.  It  was  not  made  good  until  the  11th 
of  August. 

Q.  Now  I  find  that  he  deposited  $500.    How  is  it  on  the 

12th  of  August  ? 

A.  He  had  the  same  balance  up  to  the  20th. 

Q.  What  was  the  balance  ? 

A.  $52.44. 

Q.  And  on  the  20th  of  August  ? 

A.  He  had  $1,014.44. 

Q.  And  on  the  21st  of  August  ? 
A.  He  had  $414.44. 

Q.  And  on  the  24th  of  August  ? 
A.  $6,709.44. 


105 


Q.  On  the  25th  of  August  ? 
A.  $739.44. 

Q.  On  the  28th  of  August  ? 
A.  $629.44. 

Q.  And  that  is  his  balance  this  morning  ? 
A.  And  that  is  his  balance  this  morning. 
Q.  When  the  account  was  overdrawn   there,  how  did  it 
come  to  your  notice  ? 

A.  The  bookkeeper  notified  me  of  the  overdraft. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  ? 

A.  I  sent  word  to  Mr.  Smith. 

Q.  Verbally? 

A.  Verbally.    I  think,  I  sent  twice ;  first,  I  think,  a  written 
notice  and  then  by  a  messenger,  verbally. 
Q.  What  was  the  reply? 

A.  He  said  that  it  would  be  attended  to,  so  far  as  I  can 
remember.  Being  the  Mayor,  I  paid  no  attention  to  it.  I 
thought  it  would  be  all  right. 

Q.  Were  the  checks  protested  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  the  protested  checks  with  you  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

(The  witness  here  produces  the  protested  checks  which  are 
read  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  Mr.  Roberts,  as 
follows)  : 

Check. 

Nos.  327,  329  and  331  Chestnut  St. 
P.  N.  P.,  7  I  12  I  '86.    J.  Brobston. 

No.  108.  Philadelphia,  July  6,  1886. 

The  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 

Pay  to  W.  I.  Thompson,  Esq.,  or  order,  Two  Hundred  and 
Eleven  tA  Dollars. 

$211.80.  WILLIAM  B.  SMITH,  Treasurer. 

14 


106 


Endorsement. 

For  deposit  to  the  credit  of  The  Camden  National  Bank. 
Isaac  C.  Martindale,  Cash'r. 

The  Camden  National  Bank,  Camden,  N.  J. 

WM.  I.  THOMPSON. 


United  States  of  America. 

No.  108.  Philadelphia,  July  G,  1886. 

The  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 
Pay  to  W.  I.  Thompson,  Esq.,  or  order.  Two  Hundred  and 
Eleven  tA  Dollars. 

8211.80  WILLIAM  B.  SMITH,  Treasurer. 

Nos.  327,  329  and  331  Chestnut  St. 

/    Wm.  I.  Thompson. 

\  For  deposit  to  the  credit  of 

End.      X  The  Camden  National  Bank. 

)  Isaac  C.  Martindale,  Cashier. 

I  Endorsement    correct.  Independence 

\  National  Bank,  Philadelphia. 

Be  it  known,  That  on  the  day  of  the  date  hereof,  at  the 
request  of  The  Independence  National  Bank,  the  holder  of  the 
original  check  or  draft,  of  which  a  true  copy  is  above  written, 
I,  the  undersigned.  Notary  Public  for  the  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania,  by  lawful  authority  duly  commissioned  and 
sworn,  residing  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  during  the  usual 
hours  of  business  for  such  purposes,  presented  the  same  at  the 
Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co.,  to  a  proper 
clerk,  there  duly  acting  and  attending,  and  competent  to  give 
ans  vers,  and  demanded  the  payment  thereof,  which  was  re- 
fused and  answer  made,  not  sufficient  funds  for  it. 


107 


Whereupon,  I,  the  said  Notary,  at  the  request  aforesaid, 
have  protested,  and  do  hereby  solemnly  protest,  against  all 
persons  and  every  party  concerned  therein,  whether  as  Maker, 
Drawer,  Drawee,  Acceptor,  Payer,  Endorser,  Guarantee, 
Surety  or  otherwise  howsoever,  against  whom  it  is  proper  to 
protest,  for  all  Exchange,  Re-exchange,  Costs,  Damages  and 
Interest,  suffered  and  to  be  suffered  for  want  of  payment 
thereof: — Of  which  demand  and  refusal  I  duly  notified  the 
Drawer  and  Endorsers. 

Thus  done  and  protested,  at  the  City  of  Phila- 
delphia, aforesaid,  the  Twelfth  day  of  July, 
1886. 

2  JOSEPH  BROBSTON, 

$2.00  jSrotary  Public. 

July  12,  1886.  $211.80. 
William  B.  Smith,  Treas..  on  Fidelity  Ins.  T.  &  S.  Dep. 
Co.,  End.    Isaac  C.  Martindale,  Cas. 
Pro.  and  Pos.  $2.06 
211.80 


$213.86 
I. 


[seal.] 


Check. 

Nos.  327,  329  &  331  Chestnut  St., 
A.  P.  R.,  N.  P.,  7  I  13  I  86. 

No.  106.  Philadelphia,  Juh/  6\  1886. 

The  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co., 

Pay  to  Rev.  Eugene  Seibert,  Principal,  or  order,  One  Hun- 
dred and  Twenty-three  pV  Dollars. 

$123.17.  WILLIAM  B.  SMITH,  Treasurer. 


108 


Endorsement. 

For  deposit  in  the  First  National  Bank  of  Bethlehem,  Pa.^ 
Eugene  Seibert,  Principal. 

Pay  Thos.  Kitchen,  Cashier  or  order  for  Collection  for  Ac- 
count of  First  Nat'l  Bank,  Bethlehem,  Pa.,  C.  E.  Breder,. 
Cashier. 

THOS.  KITCHEN,  Attorney. 


A.  P.  Rutherford,  Notary  Public,  312  Stock  Exchange  Place,, 
Philadelphia. 

United  States  of  America. 
No.  103.  Philadelphia,  July  6,  1886. 

The  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 
Pay  to  Rev.  Eugene  Seibert,  Principal,  or  order,  one  hundred 
and  twenty-three  tW  dollars, 

(Signed)    WILLIAM  B.  SMITH,  Treasurer. 
(Endorsed)    For  deposit  in  the  First  National  Bank 
$123.17  of  Bethlehem,  Pa. 

EUGENE  SEIBERT,  Principal. 

Pay  Theo.  Kitchen,  Cashier,  or  order,  for  collection  for  ac- 
count of  First  Nat'l  Bank,  Bethlehem,  Pa., 

C.  E.  BREDER,  CasJiier. 

Be  it  known^  That  on  the  day  of  the  date  hereof,  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  Central  National  Bank  of  Philadelphia,  the  holder 
of  the  original  check  of  which  a  true  copy  is  above  written  I, 
ALONZO  P.  RUTHE  IFORD,  Notary  Public  for  the  Com- 
monwealth  of  Pennsylvania,  by  lawful  authority  duly  commis- 
sioned and  sworn,  residing  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  during 
the  usual  hours  of  business  for  such  purposes,  presented  the 
same  at  the  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co., 
Phila.,  where  it  is  made  payable  to  a  proper  clerk  there  duly 
acting  and  attending,  and  competent  to  give  answers,  and  de- 


109 


manded  the  payment  thereof,  which  was  refused,  and  answer 
made  ''not  sufficient  funds." 

Whereupon,  I,  the  said  Notary,  at  the  request  aforesaid 
have  protested,  and  do  hereby  solemnly  protest  against  all  per- 
sons and  every  party  concerned  therein,  whether  as  Maker, 
Drawer,  Drawee,  Acceptor,  Payer,  Endorser,  Guarantee, 
Surety,  or  otherwise  howsoever  against  whom  it  is  proper  to 
protest  for  all  Exchange,  Re-Exchange,  Costs,  Damages,  and 
Interest,  suffered  and  to  be  suffered  for  want  of  Payment 
thereof.  Of  all  of  which  I  duly  notified  the  Drawer  and  En- 
dorsers. 

Thus  done  and  protested  at  the  City  of  Phila- 
delphia, aforesaid  the  Thirteenth  day  of 
[seal.]  July,  1886. 

A.  P.  RUTHERFORD, 
Notarial  Fee,  $2.00.  Notary  Public. 

July  13th,  1886.  $123.tVV. 

WILLIAM  B.  SMITH, 

Treasurer. 

Protest,  $206. 

$125.23. 

C.  E.  BREDER, 

Cashier. 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  This  check  (indicating  check)  is  dated  July  6th  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  these  checks  presented  at  your  bank  ? 
A.  This  one  (indicating  check)  was  presented — the  check 
for  $211.80  was  presented  July  12th. 

Q.  What  balance  did  Mayor  Smith  have  on  that  date  ? 
A.  Twenty-three  cents. 


110 


Q.  On  the  12th  of  July  he  had  twenty-three  cents  to  his 
credit,  so  that  when  this  check  of  $211.80  was  presented  it 
was  not  paid  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  when  the  one  for  $123.17  was  presented  it  was  ? 

A.  The  same  thing. 

Q.  How  much  did  he  have  then  ? 

A.  Twenty-three  cents. 

Q.  So,  of  course,  the  check  was  not  paid  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  they  been  paid  since  ? 

A.  They  have  been  paid  since — yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  were  they  paid  ? 

A.  The  one  for  $211.80  was  paid  on  July  21st. 
Q.  And  the  other  one  ? 

A.  The  one  for  $123.17  was  paid  on  July  31st. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  settlement  of  the  account  since  you 
paid  those  checks  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  So  you  are  holding  them  now  as  vouchers  ? 
A.  As  vouchers. 

Q.  Since  the  settlement  of  July  17th  there  have  been  a 
number  of  transactions  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  Mayor  has  drawn  a  number  of  checks  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  those  with  you  ? 
A.  I  have. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  number  of  checks.) 

Q.  How  many  are  there  of  them,  about? 

A.  14 — 16  altogether,  with  the  two  protested. 

Q.  Suppose  you  read  them  ? 


Ill 


(The  witness  proceeds  to  read  the  checks,  in  obedience  to 
t  le  request  of  the  Committee,  and  sajs,  "  No.  115,  July  20th,"^ 
when  he  is  stopped  by  Mr.  White,  of  counsel  for  the  Mayor^ 
who  speaks  as  follows  :) 

Mr.  White :  As  these  proceedings  are  'ex  parte^  which 
fact  has  been  intimated  to  us  by  the  Committee,  I  suppose  that 
we  can  now  only  make  a  protest.  We  do  make  that  protest. 
The  Mayor  stated  to  this  Committee  that  the  account  he  pre- 
sented showed  the  amount  of  the  moneys  deposited  over  and 
above  what  came  from  the  city,  and  stated  that  he  used  that 
account  as  his  own.  You  have  the  deposits  and  the  amounts' 
drawn  before  you,  but  it  seems  to  us  that  this  Committee  is 
now  about  to  proceed  to  examine  private  accounts  or  the  pri- 
vate checks  of  this  gentleman,  w^hich  have  been  given  in  his 
general  business.  That  cannot  be  required  for  any  purpose 
germain  to  this  investigation,  because  the  fact  is  admitted  and 
established  that  that  is  his  personal  account  of  money  deposited 
to  his  personal  credit.  I  would  like  to  know  how  this  public 
body  is  going  to  justify  itself  in  a  search  into  the  private  trans- 
actions of  William  B.  Smith,  or  of  persons  in  no  way  con- 
cerned with  these  transactions  which  the  Committee  are  inves- 
tigating. I  would  like  to  know,  also,  how  this  bank  is  justified 
in  producing  such  testimony  upon  any  subpoena  without  being 
compelled  by  any  court,  upon  any  plea  that  it  is  germain  or 
proper  to  this  investigation.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying 
that  no  court  in  this  Commonwealth  would  stop  for  a  moment 
in  saying  that  snch  a  course,  was  not  proper.  It  is  simply  to 
ascertain  with  what  persons  Mr.  Smith  may  have  had  money 
transactions,  to  whom  he  may  have  given  checks,  and  for  what 
amounts.  The  examination  would  concern  desultory  checks 
of  small  amounts  given  in  a  long  number  of  years  in  an  ac- 
count where  $48,000  have  been  deposited  in  one  year,  and  we 
would  respectfully  submit  that  it  is  not  within  the  province  of 
the  Committee  to  investigate  such  matters,  which  are  not  rela- 
tive to  the  inquiry.  There  may  be  other  things — many  things 
— I  don't  know  what  there  may  be  in  those  checks.  There 


112 


may  be  payments  by  Mr.  Smith  which  it  would  be  hurtful  to 
his  business,  or  hurtful  to  the  business  of  others,  to  know  any- 
thing about — contained  in  the  checks.  I  don't  know  what  is 
in  those  checks.  For  that  reason  I  put  our  protest  in.  As  I 
said  before,  the  fact  as  admitted  and  proved  in  every  way  that 
this  money,  if  it  was  city  money,  was  paid  to  his  personal 
account.  Of  course,  we  will  have  something  to  say,  whether 
it  was  city  money  or  not,  when  the  proper  time  comes.  But 
we  do  not  now  propose  to  give  any  trouble  about  that.  We 
have  no  object,  either,  to  prove  the  balance  in  his  favor,  but  I 
submit  that  the  Committee  are  now  going  into  transactions 
concerning  their  purposes,  which  are  not  germain  to  this 
inquiry. 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  What  action  will  the  Committee 
take  upon  the  protest  made  by  the  Counsel  for  the  Mayor  ? 

Mr.  Clay :  If  I  understand  the  answer,  or  the  document 
which  came  from  the  Mayor,  it  was  that  the  City  moneys  which 
came  into  his  hands  were  deposited  in  a  separate  account,  as 
Treasurer,  in  order  that  there  should  be  no  trouble  to  distin- 
guish them  from  his  own  personal  moneys.  If  that  be  the 
case,  it  occurs  to  me  that  the  Committee  has  a  right  to  learn 
how  these  moneys  have  been  deposited,  and  used,  so  that  the 
Committee  may  know  how  to  divide  what  has  been  deposited 
on  account  of  his  private  affairs  and  as  Mayor  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia.  But  if  it  is  necessary  to  go  any  further,  and 
if  there  is  any  difficulty  about  the  question,  I  would  suggest 
that  we  ask  of  the  City  Solicitor  whether  or  not  the  Commit- 
tee has  the  right  to  demand  that  the  checks  shall  be  read. 

Mr.  White :  I  would  suggest,  as  a  member  of  the  Commit- 
tee has  intimated  something  as  admitted  by  the  Mayor,  of 
which  I  have  no  knowledge  as  admitted  by  him,  I  would  sug- 
gest that  the  Committee  settle  the  question  promptly,  because 
it  is  a  matter  of  importance.  Certainly  there  is  nothing  now 
before  the  Committee  which  would  justify  the  remarks  made 
by  a  certain  member  of  the  Committee.    There  is  no  such 


113 


statement  or  demand  made,  so  far  as  the  minutes  of  the  Com- 
mittee go,  that  the  Mayor  kept  a  separate  account  of  those 
moneys.    You  have  the  Mayor's  statement  and  his  letter. 

Mr.  Lawrence  :  I  presume  that  the  reports  which  were  pub- 
lished in  several  newspapers,  purporting  to  be  statements  of 
his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  that  he  had  deposited  this  money  as 
Treasurer,  and  kept  it  separate  from  his  own  accounts,  I  pre- 
sume that  those  were  the  reasons  for  introducing  this  evidence. 
But  as  the  fact  is  admitted  by  Counsel  that  he  did  not  keep 
this  money  separate  from  his  own  account,  I  do  not  see  that 
there  is  any  occasion  to  go  further  in  this  line.  I  would  sug- 
gest that  the  reading  of  the  checks  be  not  admitted  as  evidence. 

If  it  is  a  personal  account  of  the  Mayor  of  money  that  he 
has  received  or  disbursed,  we  have  no  right  to  go  into  it,  only 
«o  far  as  he  is  affected  as  Mayor  of  the  City.  If  he  admits 
that  this  money  was  his  personal  account  and  so  used — and  if 
bis  Counsel  now  here  so  admit — then  the  proof  is  established 
by  admission,  and  I  for  one,  w^ould  not  like  to  disturb  or 
humiliate  the  Mayor  or  any  other  man  as  to  any  matter  of  his 
private  concerns — beyond  what  it  is  my  plain  duty  to  perform. 
Consequently,  I  move  that  the  reading  of  the  checks  be  not 
insisted  upon,  because  at  this  stage  of  the  proceedings  that 
proof  has  already  been  admitted. 

Mr.  Clay  :  I  would  call  attention  to  a  communication  which 
we  received  from  the  Mayor  on  Saturday  last. 

(Mr.  Clay  here  reads  from  the  communication  sent  by  the 
Mayor  to  the  Committee.) 

Mr.  Claridge :  I  will  second  the  motion  of  Mr.  Lawrence 
that  the  checks  be  not  now  read. 

Mr.  Roberts :  (the  Chairman).  It  is  moved  and  seconded 
that  the  reading  of  the  checks  be  discontinued. 

Mr.  Bardsley  :  I  am  not  ready,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  have  that 
motion  put.     I  prefer  to  hear  from  our  counsel,  the  City 
Solicitor,  first,  and  then  if  it  be  desirable,  we  can  retire  for 
consultation. 
15 


114 


Mr.  Lawrence :  I  withdraw  my  motion  for  that  purpose. 

Mr.  Bardsley  :  I  desire  to  know  what  the  opinion  of  the 
City  Solicitor  is.  If  he  desires  it  we  will  retire  for  consulta- 
tion. 

Mr.  Warwick :  (The  City  Solicitor.)  I  am  ready,  as  I  am 
here  to  advise  the  Committee  at  any  time  when  they  may  desire 
my  advice. 

Mr.  Bardsley :  I  would  like  to  know  whether  the  City  So- 
licitor is  ready  to  give  his  opinion  now. 

Mr.  Warwick :  Oh,  yes.  I  can  advise  you  upon  the  ques- 
tion in  regard  to  law,  but  I  think  under  the  circumstances, 
you  had  better  retire,  inasmuch  as  you  do  not  sit  here  as 
judges  to  pass  upon  questions  of  law,  but  sit  here  for  the  simple 
purpose  of  investigating  these  questions  to  satisfy  your  own 
mind,  whether  or  not  articles  of  impeachment  shall  be  brought 
against  his  Honor,  the  Mayor  of  the  City.  It  is  a  matter 
more  of  discretion  to  satisfy  your  own  minds,  than  a  matter  of 
law  at  this  time. 

If  you  believe  that  you  have  now  enough  before  you  in  order 
to  determine  that  question,  then  I  do  not  see  that  there  is  any 
need  to  go  into  the  private  accounts  of  any  person.  But  if 
you  want  my  advice  upon  questions  of  law — if  you  desire  to  be 
instructed  on  them,  I  can  give  you  them  in  a  moment. 

Mr.  Bardsley  :  I  move  that  the  Committee  retire  for  con- 
sultation. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Bardsley.  It 
was  agreed  to.  Whereupon,  the  Committee  retire  into  the 
Chamber  of  the  Common  Council  for  consultation. 

After  consultation. 

The  Committee  return  to  the  Select  Council  Chamber  after 
their  consultation  and  are  called  to  order  by  the  Chairman — 
Mr.  Roberts. 

Mr.  Roberts :  (Chairman.)  The  Committee  have-  decided 
to  hear  the  evidence. 


115 


Mr.  White :  (Of  Counsel  for  Mayor  Smith.)  I  desire  to 
state  to  the  Committee  that  since  you  went  into  Executive 
Session,  I  have  received  a  message  from  the  Mayor  stating 
that  while  he  entirely  agrees  with  the  course  I  have  pursued, 
yet,  voluntarily,  he  desires  that  the  checks  shall  be  read,  if  any 
gentleman  of  the  Committee  has  any  curiosity  about  them. 

Mr.  Roberts  :  (Chairman.)  The  Committee  have  decided 
the  course  to  pursue. 


Robert  M.  Scott,  recalled  : 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman :  Mr.  Scott,  you  will  now  proceed 
with  the  reading  of  the  checks. 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  number  of  checks.) 

Mr.  Clay :  Please  give  them  to  us  in  their  order  as  they  are 
numbered,  and  we  will  figure  up  the  amounts. 

The  Witness.    Very  well.    I  have  now  arranged  them  in 


order. 

The  first  is 

No. 

Date. 

Name. 

Amount. 

115, 

July  20, 

George  Hopp, 

$700 

00 

116, 

July  20, 

H.  Linaka, 

432 

40 

117, 

July  24, 

W.  K.  Stuart,  . 

80 

00 

118, 

July  26, 

A.  R.  Gunn, 

600 

00 

119, 

July  27, 

R.  W.  G.  Lauer, 

17 

50 

120, 

July  27, 

Henry  W.  Fitch,  Cashier, 

399 

30 

121, 

August  2, 

Mrs.  W.  B.  Smith, 

100 

00 

122, 

August  6, 

J.  Grist,      .        .        .  . 

58 

00 

123, 

August  20, 

Frank  F.  Bell,  City  Treas., 

400 

00 

124, 

August  20, 

Geo.  Hopp, 

200 

00 

125, 

August  23, 

Frank  F.  Bell,  City  Treas.,  . 

2,300 

00 

126, 

August  24, 

u  u 

5,300 

00 

127, 

August  24, 

a  a 

670 

00 

127, 

August  27,, 

a  u 

128 

00 

116 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  That  is  all  since  the  last  settlement,  with  the  exception 
of  the  two  protested  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  would  like  you  to  fix  in  your  mind  as  near  as  possible 
when  the  trustee  account  was  closed — whether  since  January 
1,  1885,  or  prior  thereto. 

A.  I  cannot  tell  without  referring  to  the  books.  We  have 
a  record  room  up-stairs  in  the  second  story,  and  we  have  to 
climb  the  stairs  and  I  didn't  go  up  to  look. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  ascertain  the  fact  and  return 
with  the  information  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Benjamin  Abrahams^  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  tes- 
tifies as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  The  segar  business. 

Q.  Where  is  jour  place  of  business  ? 
A.  At  No.  814  South  street. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mrs.  Ettie  Heyman  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  What  business  does  she  follow  ? 

A.  None  at  present. 

Q.  What  business  did  she  follow  ? 
A.  The  pawnbroking  business. 

Q.  When  did  she  discontinue  it  ? 

A.  In  the  latter  part  of  April  of  this  year. 


117 


Q.  How  long  had  she  been  in  it  ? 

A.  Thirteen  years  to  my  knowledge,  or  longer.    I  don't 
know  how  much  longer. 
Q.  At  that  place  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  she  out  of  the  city  now  ? 

A.  She  is. 

Q.  Where  is  she  ? 

A.  In  Germany,  on  a  visit. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  her  having  a  license  to  con- 
duct her  pawnbroking  business  in  1886  ? 

A.  Well,  in  1886,  in  the  first  week  in  January,  she  paid  to 
them  for  a  license  $100. 


Q. 

Where  ? 

A. 

In  the  Mayor's  Office — to  Major  Linton. 

Q. 

You  say  in  January  ? 

A. 

Yes,  sir. 

Q. 

It  was  for  this  year's  license  ? 

A. 

For  this  year. 

Q. 

Did  you  see  her  pay  it  ? 

A. 

No,  sir ;  but  parties  seen  her  pay  it. 

Q. 

You  say  she  paid  it,  but  jou  did  not  see  her  pay 

it? 

A. 

No,  sir. 

Q. 

Were  you  there  with  her  ? 

A. 

No,  sir. 

Q. 

Who  was  there  with  her  ? 

A. 

The  party  what  saw  her  pay  it  was  Mr.  Linse, 

a  pawn 

broker  on  South  street, 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  she  paid  it — simply  by  hearsay  ? 
A.  By  hearsay  and  by  him. 

Q.  Did  she  tell  you  that  she  paid  it  ? 

A.  She  did.    Her  bond  was  filed  and  her  insurance  was  all 


right.    I  know  of  the  insurance,  because  I  took  the  insurance 


118 

to  the  Mayor  to  get  a  rebate  when  she  was  going  out  of  busi- 
ness. That  was  her  insurance,  and  I  took  it  there  to  get  the 
rebate. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  What  was  the  amount  of  the  insurance? 
A.  Thirty  dollars— for  $5,000. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Did  you  procure  the  insurance  ? 

A.  I  procured  the  insurance  from  Major  Linton,  and  got 
the  rebate. 

0.  Did  you  hand  to  Major  Linton  the  policy  of  insurance? 
A.  No,  sir ;  she  handed  it  to  me  back. 

Q.  She  wanted  something  out  of  the  insurance  ?  When  did 
she  go  out  of  the  business?  Or  she  wanted  something  out  of 
it  when  she  went  out  of  the  business  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  got  her  policy  of  insurance  back  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  hand  you  anything  else  back  ? 

A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  What  about  the  bond  ? 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  the  bond? 

Q.  He  did  not  hand  that  back  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  really  know  anything  about  the  pay- 
ment of  the  money  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  anybody  here  that  does  ? 

A.  I  don't  believe  there  is.  But  Mr.  Linse  told  me  on 
Saturday  he  saw  Mrs.  Heyman  pay  it. 


119 

By  Mr.  Claridge: 

Q.  You  don't  really  know  anything  about  the  matter,  except 
what  is  hearsay  evidence  ? 

A.  I  only  know  what  I  just  told  you.  There  is  nothing 
else  that  I  can  state. 

Q.  You  just  make  this  statement  from  hearsay  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  You  succeeded  this  lady  in  business  "r 

A.  No.    I  did  not  succeed  her,  but  I  am  acting  for  her. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  All  that  you  know  is  that  you  received  the  policy  of 
insurance  back  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — with  Mayor  Smith's  signature,  and  that  I  got 
the  rebate. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  This  lady  continued  in  the  business  until  the  latter  part 
of  April,  this  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  she  have  a  license  for  this  year? 
A.  She  had  not  received  a  license  up  to  date. 
Q.  Then  she  conducted  her  business  for  four  months  with- 
out a  license  ? 

A.  That  is  how  it  looks. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  notified  them  about  getting  a  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  this  money  was  ever  returned  to 
the  City  Treasurer  among  other  money 

A.  I  don't  believe  it  has  ever  been  accounted  for. 

Q.  I  am  asking  you  what  you  know,  not  what  you  believe. 
You  know  that  she  conducted  her  business  four  months  with- 
out a  license  ? 

A.  Without  having  a  license. 


120 

Q.  Was  any  effort  made  to  get  a  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir  ;  it  was  not. 

By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  You  were  acting  as  her  agent  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  knew  that  you  were  carrying  on  this  business 
without  a  license? 

A.  I  knew  it  was  paid  for. 

Q.  But  you  knew  that  you  were  really  carrying  on  this- 
business  without  a  license  after  getting  this  insurance  back, 
unlawfully  ? 

A.  No  ;  when  I  got  the  insurance  back  she  had  retired  from 
business. 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  carry  it  on  without  a  license  ? 
A.  Yes  ;  from  January  up  to  that  date. 
Q.  There  was  no  attempt  made  to  get  this  license  ? 
A.  No  attempt  whatever,  because  we  thought  it  was  not  re- 
quired. 

Q.  How  long  had  you  been  in  the  business  of  pawnbroking  ? 
A.  Do  you  mean  how  long  she  had  been  ? 
Q.  Yes. 

A.  For  thirteen  years  she  had  been. 

Q.  And  you  did  not  think  it  was  necessary   to  get  a 
license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


Robert  P.  Dechert,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testifies 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  You  are  the  Controller  of  the  city  ? 
A.  I  am. 


121 


Q.  We  have  received  through  you  from  the  President  of 
Common  Council  a  letter  and  statement.  Do  you  swear  to 
their  correctness  ? 

A.  I  do,  so  far  as  it  appears  to  be  stated  of  my  own  know- 
ledge ;  but  so  far  as  it  is  not,  it  is  upon  information  and 
belief.    That  is  as  to  the  letter. 

Q.  What  can  you  say  with  regard  to  the  year  1885  ?  Your 
communication  is  confined  to  the  current  year  ? 

A.  The  letter  and  the  correspondence  attached  refer  entirely, 
I  think,  to  1886.  As  to  1885,  I  have  a  copy  of  a  statement 
of  the  City  Treasurer  when  the  returns  were  made,  and  if  you 
w^ant  the  details  I  can  give  them  to  you. 

Q.  Well,  what  are  they  ? 
A.  There  was  paid  : 


January  6th,  .....  $25 
January  8th,       .        ....  25 

March  13th,  125 

March  31st,        .        .        .       .       .  150 

April  25th,   34.30 

April  30th,  200 

June  15th,    '  75 

July  2d,   5 

August  25th  600 

August  31st,  500 

September  5th,  628 

September  24th,  25 

December  18th,   30.94 

December  18th,  .  *     .       .       .       .  2,000 

December  21st,   800 

December  26th,   1,500 

December  30th,  .        .        .        .        .  125 

December  31st,  .....  456 

December  31st,   2,100 


16 


$9,404.24 


122 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Those  are  the  receipts  for  1885  ? 

A.  Those  are  the  Treasurer's  receipts  for  1885.  This 
transcript  (indicating  paper)  will  show  from  what  classes  of 
subjects  these  moneys  came,  but  not  from  the  individuals. 
There  w^as  no  such  detailed  return  made  in  1885.  It  was  not 
called  for,  and  I  know  of  no  law^  or  ordinance  that  requires  it 
to  be  made.  I  find  that  the  practice,  going  back  at  least  for 
the  two  preceding  Mayors,  has  been  that  such  a  return  has 
not  been  made.  The  only  return  made  to  the  Treasurer  was  a 
copy  of  the  receipt  of  the  Treasurer  when  payments  w^ere 
made  which  set  out  the  amount  which  came  from  the  different 
classes,  but  not  from  the  individuals.  Those  returns  are  here 
and  can  be  produced. 

Q.  Is  it  a  part  of  your  duty  to  demand  from  the  Depart- 
ments a  monthly  account. 

A.  Not  of  the  Mayor's  Department,  unless  I  have  some 
information  or  knowledge  given  to  me  to  take  it  out  of  the 
ordinary  rule.  I  know  of  no  law  or  ordinance  which  makes  it 
the  duty  of  the  Mayor  to  send  to  the  Controller  a  detailed 
return,  either  weekly  or  monthly,  or  in  any  period. 

Q.  So  that  through  the  year  1885  the  Mayor  made  the 
returns  at  his  convenience  under  these  dates  which  you  have 
given  us  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  At  the  time  the  practice  was — for  instance  on 
January  6th  he  w^ould  take  f  25  to  the  Treasurer's  office,  and 
he  would  obtain  two  receipts.  One  he  would  keep  and  the 
duplicate  he  w^ould  send  to  the  Controller's  office.  That  would 
be  entered  up  against  him  and  be  subsequently  used  in  audit- 
ing his  accounts,  and  as  a  check  on  the  Treasurer's  account, 
so  in  his  returns  there  might  be  an  interval  of  thirty  or  sixty 
days  intervening.  As  I  have  said,  I  know  of  no  official  infor- 
mation that  would  come  to  my  office — to  the  Controller's  office 
— that  would  lead  me  to  know  officially  that  there  was  any- 


123 


thing  in  the  hamds  of  the  Mayor.  As  an  individual  I  might 
think  so. 

Q.  It  is  customary  for  you  to  inquire  from  the  departments 
as  to  their  probable  receipts  and  expenditures  for  the  current 
year.  You  made  such  an  inquiry  from  the  Mayor's  Depart- 
ment in  1886,  and  you  received  his  answer? 

A.  I  made  that  inquiry  in  July  of  1885.  It,  of  course, 
must  be  made  in  order  to  get  into  the  statement  made  to  City 
Councils  on  the  first  of  September,  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Act  of  1879. 

Q.  What  was  his  answer  as  to  the  anticipated  receipts  for 
1886? 

A.  He  answered  that  the  probable  receipts  would  be  $8,000. 

Q.  Now,  we  commenced  in  1886.  When  was  your  atten- 
tion called,  or  when  did  you  call  the  attention  of  the  Mayor 
to  the  necessity  of  paying  the  moneys  that  he  might  have  ? 

A.  The  first  time  Avas  in  either  May  or  June. 

Q.  Of  this  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  That  was  in  the  interview  in  my  office. 
There  were  a  number  of  bills  that  were  laid  aside  because  of 
some  supposed  irregularity,  and  the  Mayor  came  up  with  his 
clerk,  who  attended  to  that  duty,  to  give  his  personal  explana- 
tion. We  disposed  of  them  all  afterwards,  and  I  reminded  the 
Mayor,  or  told  him,  that  I  had  something  further  to  say  that 
we  were  interested  in.  I  reminded  him  that  his  payments  in 
1885  were  made  quite  late — some  on  the  last  day  of  the  year, 
near  the  close  of  business,  and  that  it  was  inconvenient  for  us 
in  making  up  our  statements  and  in  keeping  our  accounts,  and 
I  asked  him  to  pay  in  whatever  moneys  he  had,  as  early  in 
the  year  as  he  could. 

Q.  As  early  as  possible  in  the  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  explained  that  our  books  were  closed  on  the 
31st  of  July,  and  that  if  his  return  for  that  period  was  not 
made  he  would  get  no  credit  in  the  annual  statement  for  fees 


124 


actually  paid — that  the  difference  between  what  was  paid  and 
the  $8,000  that  he  had  estimated,  would  be  paid,  except  the 
probable  receipts  for  the  remaining  five  months. 

Q.  You  mean  to  refer  to  your  annual  statement,  as  before, 
on  the  first  of  September,  to  Councils  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  he  thanked  me  for  calling  his  attention  to  it 
and  said  it  would  be  attended  to. 

Q.  That  was  in  May  ? 

A.  Either  in  May  or  June. 

Q.  Well,  what  was  the  next  thing  ? 

A.  I  was  absent  from  the  city  for  one  week,  ending  on  July 
19th  at  the  military  encampment  of  the  State.  On  my  return- 
home,  or  on  getting  to  my  office  on  Monday  the  19th,  the 
energies  of  all  the  clerks  in  the  office  were  at  once  directed  to 
the  preparation  of  the  annual  statement  which  involves  a  great 
many  calculations,  and  of  course,  it  was  very  desirable  to  have 
it  as  accurate  as  possible.  In  getting  from  the  Treasurer  a 
definite  statement  of  the  amounts  that  the  several  departments 
had  actually  paid  in  during  the  year,  it  appeared  the  Mayor 
had  not  paid  in  any  of  the  moneys  that  he  had  received,  as  I 
requested  he  should  do,  except  $2.50.  There  were  two  full 
weeks  in  which  to  do  this.  Immediately  his  attention  was 
called  to  the  matter  by  telephone.  The  chief  clerk,  I  think 
on  each  occasion,  sent  the  message  by  telephone,  and  on  at 
least  three  of  those  occasions,  I  was  by  his  side  and  the  mes- 
sage was  communicated  to  me. 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  : 

Q.  Who  is  the  chief  clerk  ?    Y^ou  mean  your  chief  clerk  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  On  another  occasion  the  attention  of  the 
messenger  was  called,  and  he  afterwards  reported  that  he  had 
called  the  Mayor's  attention  to  it.  These  messages  were,  that 
whatever  moneys  the  Mayor  had  received  from  the  several 
sources — whatever  he  had  received  during  1886  should  be  paid 
in,  or  he  would  not  get  the  credit  in  the  statement  that  I  have 


125 


spoken  of.  Each  time  the  reply  came  back  that  they  would 
do  so.  The  last  message  was  sent  either  on  the  30th  or  the 
31st  of  July.  My  recollection  is  that  the  30th  came  on  a 
Friday,  and  the  message  came  back  from  Mr.  Linton  that  the 
Mayor  had  gone  to  Atlantic  City,  and  had  taken  the  return 
and  would  make  up  the  account  and  pay  it.  On  the  following 
Monday  on  getting  to  my  office,  I  sent  to  the  Treasurer  to  see 
whether  any  payment  had  been  made  by  the  Mayor  on  the 
previous  Saturday,  and  the  answer  was  that  there  had  been 
none.  That  would  have  preceded  the  making  up  of  the  annual 
statement — which  was  made  up,  as  I  did  not  desire  it  to  be 
made  up,  because  I  w^anted  the  column  of  actual  receipts  for 
the  seven  months  to  be  as  true  as  possible. 

Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  So,  in  point  of  fact,  up  to  the  first  of  August  of  this  year, 
the  Mayor  had  paid  in  $2.50  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  will  say  now,  because  I  may  forget  it — I 
will  put  this  fact  before  you,  that  if  I  had  w^anted  to  communi- 
<jate  to  Councils  on  any  matter  of  sufficient  importance,  that 
Councils  were  in  recess,  and  that  consequently,  the  communi- 
cation would  have  been  postponed  until  the  regular  period, 
when  it  was  my  duty  to  communicate  this — that  is,  at  the  first 
meeting  of  Councils  after  the  1st  of  September. 

Q.  Have  you  a  statement  showing  the  amounts  paid  in  by 
the  Mayor  since  the  1st  of  August  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  a  statement  of  the  amounts  he  received,  prior 
to  the  1st  of  August  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

(The  witness  here  produces  papers.) 

Q.  That  is  what  he  collected  and  did  not  pay  in  ? 
A.  According  to  his  returns.     I  have  abstracted  some  re- 
sults from  his  return,  which  I  am  prepared  to  give  you. 


126 


Q.  You  mean  from  the  Mayor's  original  return  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — and  the  papers  attached  to  it.  It  has  been 
called  for  specially.  It  is  an  itemized  return,  setting  out  first 
the  CO,  1  oil  licenses — his  returns  for  the  coal  oil  licenses — 

Q.  But,  first,  please  give  me  the  returns  of  the  Mayor  on 
certain  dates,  in  round  sums.  We  will  come  into  the  other 
details  afterwards.  What  was  the  first  payment  that  the 
Mayor  made  ? 

A.  Made  to  the  Treasurer  ? 

Q.  No.  I  want  to  know  what  he  collected.  What  did  he 
collect  in  January  according  to  his  statement  ? 


A.  From  coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale,  .  .  $140 

In  February, ......  80 

March,     ......  60 

April,  ,  30 

July  1st,  .  .  .  .  .  .10 

July  14th,  10 


330 

Coal  Oil  Licenses,  Retail. 
January,       ......  $20 

February,      .  .  .  .  .  .130 

March,  230 

April,  ......  60 


440 

Redemption  of  dogs. 

April,  $104 

May,  148 

June,  190 

August  13th,  .  .  .  .  .444 


$886 


127 


Sale  of  cow  and  horse  and  carriage. 


February, 
August  24th, 


March, 
April, 

Auo:ust  10th, 


January, 
February, 
March, 
April, 
May, 
June, 
July  2d, 
August  17th, 
August  24th, 


January, 
February, 


March, 

April, 

June, 

August  10th, 


Fines  imposed. 


Pawnbrokers'  Licenses. 


From  Theatrical  Licenses. 


Gunpowder  Licenses. 


.  $2  50 
.  13  25 

$15  75 

.  $4  76 
.  2  38 
.    7  14 

$14  28 

5,400 
500 
300 
?00 
200 
300 
100 
100 
800 

$8,000 

.  $100 
.  100 

$200 

.  $5  00 
.  5  00 
.  10  00 
.    5  00 


$25  00 


128 


Q.  What  does  that  make  a  total  of? 

A.  $10,071.03,  with  $150  off,  because  that  was  paid  after 
my  return  to  the  city. 

Q.  Well,  it  makes  $9,911.03  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  state  to  the  Committee  the  times  and  the  amounts 
when  he  paid  moneys  into  the  city  treasurer  during  this  year, 
commencing  with  January  ? 

A.  February  1st,  $2.50. 

Q.  What  were  his  receipts  during  the  month  of  January, 
^altogether  ? 

A.  I  can  give  you  his  balances  on  each  class  of  items  in  the 
month  of  January. 
Q.  Give  them  to  us  ? 

A.  At  the  request  of  the  City  Solicitor  I  have  somewhat 
hastily,  but  I  think  the  calculations  are  entirely  right,  but  in- 
tend to  have  them  verified,  my  excuse  being  that  it  was  not 
received  until  late  on  Saturday  evening.  Compared  the 
returns  furnished  by  the  Mayor  on  the  27th  of  August  with  a 
copy  of  the  receipts  by  him  to  the  City  Treasurer,  made  by 
him,  which  was  furnished  to  me  by  the  City  Treasurer,  and  I 
find  that  he  had  in  his  hands  on  the  dates  the  following  bal- 
ances— in  January  : 

Q.  If  you  will  allow  me  we  will  come  to  that  after  a  little 
while.  I  want  to  know  how  much  the  Mayor  has  collected  in 
his  office  in  the  month  of  January,  1886  ? 

A.  Coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale,  .  .  $140 

Coal  oil  license,  retail,  ...  20 
Pawnbrokers'  license,        .  .  .  5,400 

Theatrical  license,  .     ^      .  .  .  100 

$5,680 

Q.  The  Mayor  says  to  you  in  his  return  that  he  collected 
$5,680  in  January  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    His  return  says  so. 


129 


Q.  How  much  did  he  pay  into  the  City  Treasury? 

A.  Nothing. 

Q.  He  collected  that  sum  of  money  and  paid  nothing  in  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  for  February  ? 


A.  Coal  oil  licenses,  wholesa' 
Coal  oil  licenses,  retail, 
Sale  of  cow,  , 
Pawnbrokers'  licenses, 
Theatrical  licenses. 


$80  00 
130  00 
2  50 
500  00 
100  00 


$812  50 

Q,  According  to  that  return  the  Mayor  received  $812.50 
in  February,  and  paid  into  the  City  Treasury  what  ? 
A.  $2.50. 

Q.  Now,  in  the  month  of  March,  what  did  the  Mayor 
collect  ? 

A.  Coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale 
"         "  retail 
Pawnbrokers  licenses 
Gunpowder  licenses  . 
Fines  imposed 


Total 


230 
300 
5 

4  76 
$599  76 


Q.  That  is,  for  the  month  of  March  he  received  $599.76, 
and  what  did  he  pay  in  ? 

A.  Nothing. 

Q.  Now  give  us  April. 
Ooal  oil  licenses,  wholesale  .  .  .  $30 


"  retail 
Redemption  of  dogs 
Fines  imposed 
Pawnbrokers 
Gunpowder 

Total  . 
17 


60 
104 

2  38 
300 
5 

$501  38 


130 


Q.  So  the  Mayor  received  $501.38  in  April.    What  did  he 
pay  in  April  ? 
A.  Nothing. 

Q.  Now  give  us  what  he  received  in  May  ? 

A.  Redemption  of  dogs  .  .  .  $143 

Sale  of  horse  and  wagon     .  .  .13  25 

Pawnbrokers  .  .  .  .      200  00 

Total  .  .  .  .  .    $361  25 


Q.  So  he  received  $361.25  according  to  his  own  statement 
in  May.    What  did  he  pay  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 
A.  Nothing. 

Q.  Now  give  us  for  June  ? 

A.  Redemption  of  dogs  .  .  .  $190 

Pawnbrokers  ....  300 

Gunpowder  licenses  .  .  .10 

Total  .....  $500 


Q.  So  he  received  $500  for  the  month  of  June  ;  and  what 
did  he  pay  into  the  City  Treasury  in  June  ? 
A.  Nothing. 
Q.  Now,  July. 

Coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale      .  .  .  .20 

Pawnbrokers  licenses   .....  100 

Total  $120 

Q.  So  he  received  $120  in  July.    What  did  he  pay  into 
the  City  Treasury  ? 
A.  Nothing. 


131 


Q.  Now,  in  August,  what  does  the  Mayor  say  he  collected  ? 
Redemption  of  dogs         ....  $444 
Fines  imposed      .  .  .  .  .         7  14 

Pawnbrokers  licenses  ....  900 
Gunpowder  license      *    .  .  .  .  5 

Total  ....  $1356  14 

Q.  What  did  he  pay  into  the  City  Treasury  in  the  month 
of  August  up  to  the  27th  of  the  month  ? 

A.  Well,  I  will  give  that  to  you  as  I  have  it  here  (referring 
to  a  statement  in  his  hands),  and  you  can  figure  it  up  for  your- 
selves : 

$    25  00 
200  00 
400  00 
2,300  00 
5,300  00 
670  00 
13  25 
886  00 
11  90 
2  38 
110  00 

Total,  $9,918  53 

Q.  That  is  up  to  and  including  the  twenty-seventh  day  of 
August  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  are  you  advised  of  the  payment  by  the  Mayor  to 
the  City  of  Philadelphia  ? 

A.  In  the  first  instance,  by  his  agent  leaving  at  the  Con- 
troller's oflfice  a  copy  of  his  receipt. 

Q.  Have  you  any  of  those  receipts  with  you  ? 
A.  Oh,  yes,  sir. 


132 


(The  witness  here  goes  to  a  clerk  of  his  office  in  attendance, 
in  the  matter,  and  procures  from  him  certain  papers.) 

By  the  witness :  The  second  mode  is  when  the  Treasurer's 
return  comes  in.  He  indicates  the  receipts  from  the  different 
sources  on  his  daily  return. 

Q.  Please  read  one  of  those  receipts. 

(The  witness  here  reads  from  one  of  the  receipts  as  follows :) 
^'August  28,  1886,  Mayor's  office,  Philadelphia"  (this  seems 
to  be  a  printed  form),  "received  of  J.  L.  Linton  for  the  Hon- 
orable William  B.  Smith,  Mayor,  four  hundred  and  twenty- 
five  dollars  for  pawnbrokers'  licenses  for  1886,  and  five  gun- 
powder licenses.  Signed,  J.  Gallagher,  for  City  Treasurer, 
and  marked  duplicate  across  the  face.") 

Q.  That  is  the  return  made  to  you  on  the  day  when  it  was 
paid  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  leave  those  papers  with  us  ? 
A.  Oh,  yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  presume  you  enter  those  amounts  in  your  books  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    The  book  is  here.    It  is  the  regular  mode  for 
all  these  payments — from  all  the  officials. 

Q.  Have  you  any  system  in  your  office  whereby  you  can 
inform  this  Committee  that  these  moneys  that  the  Mayor  has 
paid  in  cover  all  that  he  has  received  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  do  not  know  of  any  system.  The  only  re- 
turn by  any  of  the  previous  Mayors  or  by  Mayor  Smith  in 
his  first  term  was  contained  in  a  similar  receipt.  Then  the 
auditors  went  to  the  Mayor's  office  to  audit  these  receipts,  and 
they  saw  that  these  receipts  corresponded  with  the  entries 
made  in  his  books  of  the  receipts.  The  audit  is  based  upon 
that,  unless  other  information  comes  to  the  Controller's  office, 
which  leads  the  auditors  to  believe  that  they  should  go  further 
— that  there  is  some  inaccuracy  concerning  the  books. 


133 


Q.  Now,  the  receipts  cover  a  number  of  subjects — coal  oil 
licenses,  wholesale  and  retail,  and  theatrical  licenses,  and  pawn- 
brokers' licenses  and  other  matters.  Have  you  any  knowledge 
of  the  receipt  of  any  moneys  by  the  Mayor  that  were  omitted 
by  him  in  his  statement  to  you  ? 

A.  The  Mayor  made  an  over-draft  of  ten  dollars.  That  is 
proved  to  be  onl}^  apparent,  because  the  next  day  a  man 
named  Henry  Stutz  sent  to  me  his  receipt  for  ten  dollars,  for 
a  retail  coal  oil  license.  The  only  other  two  instances  I  know 
of  are  the  case  of  Kosenthal,  who  called  to  see  me  and  said 
that  he  had  paid  one  hundred  dollars  for  a  license,  but  his 
name  was  not  contained  in  the  return  ;  and  another  one  who 
preceded  him,  Mr.  B.  Abraham,  I  think.  He  said  that  his 
mother-in-law  had  paid,  in  the  presence  of  some  witnesses, 
one  hundred  dollars.  In  my  calculations  I  have  not  included 
anything  not  in  the  returns. 

Q.  With  the  exception  of  those  two  pawn-brokers'  licenses, 
Rosenthal  and — 

A.  I  do  not  remember  the  name ;  but  I  believe  it  was  for  a 
woman  whose  name  was  Hettie  Hyman. 

Q.  With  those  exceptions  you  have  no  knowledge  of  any 
moneys  having  been  paid  to  the  Mayor,  that  he  has  not  ac- 
counted for  in  his  statement  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  means  whatever  of  verifying  his  state- 
ment, by  records  in  your  office  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  The  return  that  he  makes  to  me  under  oath 
is  conclusive,  unless  subsequent  proofs  are  made  to  me  through 
some  other  channel. 

Q.  It  has  been  stated  in  the  public  press  that  there  are  on 
the  roll  of  the  police  officers  some  who  do  not  perform  any 
service.  What  check  have  you,  if  any,  in  your  office,  against 
a  system  of  that  kind  ? 

A.  Well,  the  first  check  is  a  roll  that  is  sent,  certified  to 
by  the  Lieutenant  of  the  District,  and  approved  by  the  Mayor 


134 


of  the  city,  and  sworn  to  by  his  designated  official,  that  the 
pay-rolls  are  correct,  and  that  the  services  charged  in  those 
rolls  have  been  rendered.  Next,  I  have  to  see  that  the  ap- 
pointees have  been  confirmed  by  Select  Council.  I  do  not 
know  of  any  other  check. 

Q.  Have  you  had  information  conveyed  to  you  through  any 
channel  of  that  being  practiced  in  the  Mayor's  Department  ? 

A.  Only  through  the  public  press  that  you  have  referred  to. 
I  have,  at  times,  temporarily  laid  aside  a  warrant  where  it 
was  alleged  that  a  man  was  not  performing  his  duty,  but  an 
investigation  having  convinced  me  that  the  charge  was  ground- 
less, I  sent  for  the  man  and  gave  him  his  warrant.  That 
occurred  in  two  or  three  instances  since  I  have  been  in  office. 
Of  course  if  any  citizen  were  to  give  me  proof  that  a  man  on 
the  roll  was  not  doing  service  I  surely  would  not  countersign 
his  warrant,  and  would  give  him  the  opportunity  of  bringing 
suit  before  a  magistrate.  I  remember  particularly  the  case  of 
a  cfntractor — a  man  who  had  a  contract  for  collecting  garb- 
age— and  I  thought  that  he  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to  draw 
his  pay  as  a  policeman,  and  so  I  retained  his  warrant  until  his 
contract  was  terminated,  after  which  he  devoted  his  whole 
time  to  his  duties,  and  then,  after  that  time,  he  got  his  war- 
rant. 

Q.  You  have  of  course  read  the  proceedings  of  Councils  of 
last  Thursday,  and  are  aware  of  the  appointment  of  this  Com- 
mittee, and  the  object  of  its  appointment.  Do  you  know  of 
any  matter  or  thing  that  would  assist  this  Committee  in  as- 
certaining the  facts  which  they  are  charged  to  ascertain,  other 
than  what  you  have  told  us  ? 

A.  There  were  three  cases  of  policemen  referred  to  in  the 
public  newspapers — one  William  Lang.  I  looked  backward 
and  found  that  his  name  appeared  on  the  rolls  regularly  in 
every  case  until  the  month  of  August,  and  after  this  agitation. 
I  purposely  referred  then  to  that  roll  of  the  Twenty-third  Dis- 
trict— naturally  did  so — and  the  name  of  Lang  did  not  appear. 


135 

My  purpose  was  to  take  it  out  and  lay  it  aside.  The  other 
cases  were  of  Ash  and  Gray,  alleged  to  be  patrolmen  but  who 
had  performed  no  duties.  I  laid  them  aside  and  did  not  coun- 
tersign them,  and  they  have  not  been  delivered.  Another 
case  which  has  been  referred  to  was  the  case  of  a  man — a 
lieutenant — I  have  forgotten  his  name — no,  Lieutenant  Bald- 
win. I  think  I  had  sufficient  knowledge  that  he  did  duty, 
from  the  fact  that  not  a  week  passed  that  he  did  not  come 
before  me  and  swear  to  the  correctness  of  the  coal  bill  for  the 
Police  Department.  This  is  his  duty,  under  an  Act  of  As- 
sembly, to  supervise  the  delivery  of  coal  to  the  Department — 
to  see  that  it  is  properly  weighed,  and  to  keep  an  account  of 
each  load,  and  to  make  proof  before  the  Controller  that  he  has 
done  so.  He  did  so,  and  I  therefore  knew  that  he  had  been 
periodically  on  service,  and  I  delivered  his  warrant  as  usual. 
I  do  not  know  of  anything  else  to  aid  you,  unless  you  want 
these  balances  (referring  to  papers  in  his  hands). 

Q.  The  name  of  Lang  appears  every  month  previous  to 
August  on  the  rolls  ? 

A.  Back  to  a  certain  period. 

Q.  Regularly  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  With  precision  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  warrants  came  to  you  in  the  regular  way  ? 
A.  By  Mr.  March,  who  is  the  Mayor's  Chief  Clerk,  desig- 
nated to  perform  that  duty. 

Q.  Has  the  name  of  Warren  King  been  called  to  your 
attention  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    Of  what  district  ? 

Q.  Of  the  Fifth  District. 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  will  make  a  note  of  it. 

(The  Controller  here,  in  a  loud  voice,  calls  to  a  clerk  from 
his  office,  who  is  present  in  the  Chamber,  to  make  a  note  of 
the  name  of  Warren  King.) 


136 


Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  other  matter  or  subject  or  informa 
tion  which  should  be  in  your  department,  or  should  have  come 
to  you  in  any  way,  that  would  assist  the  Committee  in  arriving 
at  a  proper  conclusion  in  the  matter  which  they  are  investi- 
gating ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  of  anything  at  this  time ;  but  if  you  can 
direct  my  mind  to  any  particular  subject  I  may  say  something. 
I  know  that  the  Maryor  was  urged  in  1885  to  pay  these  moneys 
in,  more  than  once. 

Q.  By  whom  ? 

A.  By  officials  of  the  Controller's  Department. 
Q.  What  were  they  urged  to  do  ? 

A.  To  pay  whatever  money  remained  in  their  hands  into 
the  Treasurer's  Department,  because  we  wanted  to  have  the 
income  of  1885 — the  money  and  fees  collected,  credited  to  the 
income  of  1885 — so  that  the  accounts  might  be  true ;  and 
wherever  we  tliought  that  a  department  might  have  money  at 
all  we  sent  word  to  them  to  pay  before  the  31st  of  December 
all  the  moneys  they  had.  That  message  was  sent  to  the 
Mayor's  Department  more  than  once.  The  last  time  was,  I 
think,  about  three  o'clock  on  the  31st  of  December.  It  may 
have  been  a  little  later. 

Q.  But  the  money  could  not. 

A.  Oh,  yes.    It  got  in. 

*Q.  Was  he  urged  by  the  officials  of  your  department  prior 
to  August  1st  of.  last  year  to  pay  the  the  money  in  ? 
A.  I  cannot  remember  that. 

Q.  But  between  August  and  December  you  do  remember  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  had  a  great  deal  on  my  hands  at  that  time^ 
and  was  not  entirely  familiar  with  the  duties  of  the  office.  I 
was  learning  something  every  day. 

Q.  He  replied,  I  presume,  that  he  would  give  the  matter  his 
attention  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  My  Chief  Clerk  is  here — Who  made  many  of 
the  requests. 


137 


(The  witness  here  produces  and  hold  in  his  hands  a  paper). 

Q.  \Yhat  is  that  statement  that  you  have  in  your  hands  ? 

A.  It  is  the  result  of  an  analysis  of  the  Mayor's  returns 
made  on  the  27th  of  August  compared  with  the  payments  into 
the  Treasury  and  which  shows,  commencing  with  January 
the  amounts,  including  the  amounts  he  had  paid  into  the 
Treasury — the  amounts  of  the  balances  of  the  public  moneys 
in  his  hands,,  designated  or  supposed. 

Q:  For  instance,  at  the  close  of  January,  he  had  or  should 
have  had  in  the  City  Treasury,  what  ? 
A.  ?5,660. 

Q.  And  he  had  there  ? 
A.  Nothing. 

Q.  At  the  close  of  February  what  ought  there  to  have  been^ 
in  there  ? 

A.  He  had  in  his  hands  at  the  close  of  February  $6,470. 

Q.  That  is  the  amount  that  ought  to  have  been  in  the  City 
Treasury  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  at  the  close  of  March  what  was  the  amount  ? 

A.  Well,  including  the  previous  payments  $7,069  76  ;  and 
for  April  $7,571  14  ;  and  for  May  $7,932  39  ;  and  on  the 
30th  of  June  $8,432  39. 

Q.  So  at  the  close  of  June  there  ought  to  have  been  in  the 
City  Treasury,  what  ? 
A.  $8,432  39. 

Q.  How  much  Avas  there  ? 

A.  Well,  I  have  given  him  credits. 

Q.  But  those  are  the  number  of  dollars  that  ought  to  have 
been  in  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
18 


138 


Q.  In  other  words  at  the  end  of  June,  he  was  short 
$8,432.89  ? 

A.  He  had  in  his  hands  that  mueh.  That  increased,  so 
that  on  the  2d  of  July  it  was  $8,834.39.  It  remained  at  that 
all  through  July  and  through  the  early  part  of  August,  until 
the  10th  of  August  when  it  decreased  to  $8,564.53. 

Q.  How  much  was  it  on  the  10th  of  August  ? 

A.  $8,564.53. 

Q.  What  is  the  amount  he  was  short  ? 
A.  Well,  it  was  the  amount  in  his  hands  ? 
Q.  Let  us  understand  it.    That  is  the  amount  that  he  with- 
held from  the  City — is  that  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  state  the  amount  over  again  ? 
A.  $8,564.53. 

Q.  That  is  the  amount  withheld  on  tliat  date  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  the  next  date  ? 

A.  It  was  the  same.  It  was  the  same  on  the  12th.  On  the 
13th  it  increased  to  $9,008.13. 

Q.  So  that  on  the  13th  there  was  withheld  how  much  ? 
A.  $9,008.13. 
Q.  Now,  the  next. 

A.  It  was  the  same  on  the  14th,  on  the  15th  and  the  16th. 
On  the  17th  it  increased  to  $9,108.53.  On  the  18th  it  was 
the  same  and  on  the  19th  it  Avas  the  same,  and  then  on  the 
20th  it  decreased  by  reason  of  payment  to  $8,483.53.  It  re- 
mained the  same  on  the  21st  and  22d  and  23d,  when  it  was 
reduced  by  payment  to  $6,183.53,  and  on  the  24th  it  was  re- 
duced to  $102.38  ;  and  on  the  27th  that  was  wiped  out. 

By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  In  1885  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  made  frequent 
demands  on  the  Mayor  for  payment  ? 
A.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  year. 


139 


Q.  Did  you  do  so  officially  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    But  not  in  writing. 

Q.  In  what  manner  ? 

A.  Verbally  to  himself — over  the  telephone. 

Q.  Did  he  answer  the  telephone  himself? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  He  might  have  been  by  the  telephone — 
by  the  side  of  the  telephone,  when  any  one  would  say  "  The 
Mayor  is  here." 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  whether  you  said  to  him  person- 
ally what  you  had  to  say — whether  he  was  alongside  the 
phone  ? 

A.  I  won't  say  that  I  spoke  to  him  personally  in  1885,  but 
I  know  that  reports  were  made  to  me  frequently  that  these 
requests  had  been  made. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  What  was  your  mode  of  communication  when  you  com- 
municated with  the  Mayor  :  .  What  did  you  do  ? 

A.  If  I  had  reason  to  believe  that  there  was  a  deliberate 
attempt  to  violate  the  law,  or  that  the  public  money  was  en- 
dangered I  would  write  a  note  to  know  about  it,  and  would 
follow  it  up  urgently. 

Q.  But  that  was  not  my  question.  I  want  to  know  in  what 
manner  you  communicated  with  the  Mayor  when  you  did 
communicate  ? 

A.  Personally,  at  the  first  interview. 

Q.  That  was  with  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  in  my  office.  I  requested  him  to  turn  in  what- 
ever moneys  he  had  collected  for  the  City  in  his  Department 
as  soon  as  he  could. 

Q.  In  1885  or  1886  ? 

A.  1886. 

Q.  I  am  now  speaking  about  1885  ? 

A.  In  1885  it  might  have  been  by  my  subordinates.  I 
think  it  was  by  my  chief  clerk — who  is  here. 


140 


By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  You  say  you  know  of  no  law  which  would  compel  the 
Mayor  to  produce  an  itemized  account  ? 

A.  Not  exactly  that.  I  have  the  right  to  call  upon  the 
Mayor,  or  upon  any  City  official  for  a  daily  itemized  account, 
if  I  believe  it  my  duty  to  do  so.  It  was  under  that  power  I 
addressed  the  letter  to  the  Mayor.  What  I  said  in  my  tes- 
timony was  that  I  did  not  know  of  any  Act  of  Assembly  or 
any  Ordmance  of  Councils  which  makes  it  obligatory  upon 
the  Mayor  to  send  to  the  Controller  a  report  weekly,  or 
monthly,  or  yearly. 

Q.  Is  there  any  law  which  compels  the  heads  of  other 
Departments  to  do  ? 

.  A.  Yes,  sir.  Some  of  them  are  compelled  by  special  laws. 
For  instance,  the  City  Solicitor.  And  the  Chief  Commis- 
sioner of  Highways  must  make  his  report  Aveek  by  week,  and 
the  Commissioner  of  City  Property  monthly,  and  there  is  an 
ordinance  which  requires  him  to  make  a  monthly  return  to  the 
Committee  to  Verify  the  Cash  Account  of  the  Treasury.  I 
think  that  many  of  the  mistakes  or  misunderstandings  which 
have  occurred  in  regard  to  this  matter  apply  here.  The  ordi- 
nance of  1872  requires  the  heads  of  Departments  to  make 
monthly  returns  to  the  Committee  of  all  moneys  turned  in, 
and  it  requires  at  the  same  time  the  Treasurer  to  make  a 
return  to  the  Committee  of  all  moneys  received  from  Heads  of 
Departments,  so  that  the  Committee  would  be  able  to  compare 
them,  and  ascertain  whether  they  were  right.  If  the  Com- 
mittee did  not  get  the  returns  they  would  want  to  know  why. 

Q.  How  do  you  audit  the  accounts  of  the  City  Treasurer? 

A.  Well,  it  is  done  by  Mr.  Pue,  and  I  would  prefer  that 
you  should  get  the  testimony  from  him. 

Q.  Do  you  have  any  check  upon  the  City  Treasurer,  other 
than  the  receipts  which  he  sends  to  you  ? 

A.  The  City  Treasurer  makes  a  daily  return  under  an  Act 
of  Assembly,  under  which  he  must  set  out  the  receipts  from. 


THE 
JOHN  CRERAR 
LIBRARY. 


Coal  On.  UcKssit, 

VKAll 

i 
1 

i 

1 

i 

1 

i 
1 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

1  1 

1 

i 
1 

- 

i 

i 

1 

1 

1 

Febrimiy 

April  

May  

I  Salk  op  Cow,  I  orsk. 


AMOUNTS   PAID   TO   CITY   TEEASURER  FROM  ALL  SOURCES. 


Fines  Imposbd, 


Pawnbbokbb's  Licessk.       Tbkatricai-  License. 


i  I 


I 

I  i  I 


141 


the  several  sources  from  which  he  gets  the  money.  If,  on  a 
certain  day,  he  has  received  from  the  Mayor  so  many  dollars, 
then  there  would  be  a  duplicate  receipt  from  the  Mayor.  If 
they  did  not  correspond  then  we  would  make  an  inquiry.  So 
it  is  with  the  Magistrates.  When  a  Magistrate  comes  and 
makes  his  return,  he  first  has  the  Treasurer's  receipt  for  the 
money  paid  in,  and  the  next  day  the  Treasurer  makes  his  re- 
turn of  the  parties  who  paid  in  so  much,  Magistrate  so  and 
so  ;  so  that  we  know. 


142 


o 

o 

CO 

C5 

Oi 

CI 

Oi 

05 

05 

Oi 

•OS- 

o 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

o 

o 

C5 

fM 

CM 

(M 

'M 

CM 

(M 

<M 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

"* 

CD 

»o 

O 

o 

iq^ 

oo" 

oo" 

oT 

oo" ' 

oo 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

(M 

<M 

CO 

(M 

CO 

CO 

CO 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

$100 

o 

o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 

o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
o 

GO 

o 
o 

CO 

o 

o 

CO 

r-  M 
a  p 


^  «• 

o  cs  a 
-  o 


o  o 
o  o 


o  o  o 
o     o  o 

CO  lO 


o  o 
o  o 
o  o 


CO 


t-- 


lO 

to 

to 

to 

lO 

lO 

to 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

t—t 

T— 1 

CO 

o 
o 

g 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

CO 
to 
CO 

CO 

C^l 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

"* 

CO 

"* 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

15 

12  i 

<D  CS  S 


o  o 
CO  to 


o     o  o 

GO  ^  ^ 
CO 


2  §  S 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

u  CO 


o 

CO  rH 
^  fO 


CO 


00 


05 


CO      rti      lO  CO 
C  ^     ^     ^     ^     ^  ^     ^  ^ 

1^  s'B's's's  S 


143 


o 

a 

C5 

o 

Oi 

Oi 

o 

o 

05 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

S<1 

(M 

(M 

Cv) 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

ut 

lO 

lO 

iC 

lO 

>.o 

o 

lO 

lO 

lit 

\0 

iC 

lO 

lO 

i-O 

ocT 

oo 

oo 

go" 

oo 

oo 

oo" 

oo 

oo 

oo 

oo 

co" 

oo 

s  . 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

(M 

Ol 

Ol 

o^ 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

o 

O 

as 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

^  1 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

G<) 

I^J 

CM 

C<1 

J^l 

(M 

(M 

o<i 

(M 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

IP 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

cS  p  E) 

o 

o 

5 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

im- 
oil 
rs. 

£^ 

t-- 

c  s  „• 

o 

>o 

uo 

lO 

lO 

(N 

<>i 

■M 

Ol 

<N 

05 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

o^ 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

%'§ 

C<1 

Ol 

o^ 

Ol 

(M 

(M 

Ol 

Ol- 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

Ol 

-f 

1* 

tl 

1  = 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

If 

-tl 

^ 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

^  c  X 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

C  cS  3 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

1-1  Ol 


CO 

"a 


>-5 


^ 

3    3  '3 

h-,       1-5  t-s 


Ci      O  I 

rH     (M  cq- 

^ 

'a  ^  ^ 
1-5     H5  1-5 


3  S3 


144 


OS 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

C5 
CO 

05 

CO 

Oi 
CO 

as 

CO 

o 

CO 

Oi 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

C5 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

Oi 
CO 

CO 
lO 

CO 

lO 

Total. 

(M 
lO 
lO 

oo" 

(M 

»o 

CO 

(M 
lO 
lO 

CO 

(N 

C<J 
lO 

oo 

C<I 
lO 

C<l 

oo" 

C\| 
lO 

»o 
oo" 

<M 
iO 

lO 

oo" 

Cvl 

lO 
lO 

oo" 

C<J 
lO 
lO 

oo" 

Cvl 

lO 
lO 

oo" 

"M 

>o 
to 
oo" 

C<l 
lO 
lC 

oo" 

rfl 
CD 
iO 

oo" 

CO 
oo 

S-i 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

Gunpc 
licen 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

(M 

o 

o 

o 

o 

lO 

la 

Theatrical 
licenses. 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

(M 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

(M 

o 
o 

o 
o 

C<1 

o 
o 
(^^ 

o 
o 

(M 

o 
o 

o 
o 

(M 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

(N 

o 
o 

C<J 

o 
o 

o 
o 

c  «  ^ 

^  2  § 


o  a 

«  c4 


lO 

»o 

lO 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

»o 

(M 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

Redemption 
of  dogs. 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

Tj^ 

<M 
^ 

(M 

^ 

(M 

CM 

(M 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

Retai 
coal  0 
license 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 
^ 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

« 

o 
o 

o 

o 

O 
O 

o 
o 

8 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 

o 

o 
o 

8 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

o 
o 

Wholes 
coal  o: 
license 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

O 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 
CO 

CO 

o 

CO 

CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 

CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 
CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 

CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

o 

l-H 

CO 

to' 

CD 

00 

ci 

00 

oi 

o 

<M 

July  2 

CO 

CO 

►> 

gus 

gus 

CO 

bo 

gus 

Angus 

gus 

gus 

gus 

CO 

s 

ao 
C3 
be 

gus 

Jul 

Jul 

Jul 

ny 

ny 

An 

Au 

Au 

Au 

Au 

< 

Au 

145 


CO 

cc 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

oo 

QO 

oo 

lO 

iO 

lO 

lO 

iO 

iO 

to 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CX) 

00 

cc 

oo 

00 

00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CI 

(M 

o 

§ 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

oo 

oo 

oo 

00 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

1— 1 

oc 

cT 

cT 

oT 

oT 

ctT 

oo" 

oo" 

<s 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

lO 

lO 

lO 

lO 

(M 

(M 

(M 

O  ®  ^ 

cs  o  5 
Oh 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o  . 

o 

o 

o 

o 

1— 

oo^ 

t-" 

I>>" 

«  «  « 

are 


00 

OO 

oo 

oo 

00 

00 

00 

OO 

oo 

OO 

00 

00 

00 

00 

oo 

CO 

CO 

CO 

(M 

o  a  a 

«  cs  5 


lO 

lO 

lO 

lO 

to 

to 

to 

CO 

CN 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

I— ( 

I— 1 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

00 

oo 

oo 

00 

oo 

00 

QO 

oo 

GO 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

00 

00 

oo 

oo 

o     o     o  o 

Ttl  Ttl  O  O 

Tfl        rtl        ^  •  rH 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

19 


S  3  3 

iuo  bC  tyo 

D  S  3 

<  <  < 


be 


S)  5b 

S  D  5 
<      ^  < 


3  3 

bo  be 
3  3 


•xi  ^       -xi  m 

3  3       3  3 

50  bfl      b£)  be 

3  3       3  3 

<  <  <  < 


146 


Oliver  C.  Boshy shelly  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows : 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  : 

Q.  What  is  your  occupation  ? 

A.  I  am  the  Chief  Clerk  in  the  Controller's  office. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  The  City  Controller  a  few  moments  ago  stated  he 
thought  it  was  you  who  called  the  Mayor's  attention  in  1885 
to  the  necessity  of  paying  in  the  moneys  which  he  had  to  pay. 
Have  you  any  recollection  of  calling  his  attention  to  that  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  was  it,  about  ? 

A.  It  was  preparatory  to  making  up  the  statement  of  Sep- 
tember 1,  1885.    It  was  done  sometime  in  July  1,  1885. 
Q.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  year  ? 
A.  No  ;  in  July,  1885. 
Q.  You  are  speaking  now  of  last  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  1885. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  to  the  Mayor,  or  to  whom  you  were 
speaking  ? 

A.  Well,  we  have  in  our  office  a  return  clerk,  and  it  is 
his  business  to  keep  an  account  of  all  the  returns  made  from 
the  various  departments  He  would  occasionally  report  to  me 
that  some  department  was  a  little  delinquent,  or  that  that  de- 
partment has  not  paid  up,  and  they  ought  to  pay  up  faster. 
Then  verbally  we  would  call  the  attention  of  the  clerks  of 
that  department  to  the  fact  that  the  returns  were  due.  The 
same  thing  was  done  in  regard  to  the  Mayor's  department. 
Mr.  March's  attention  was  called  to  it,  and  he  promised  that 
the  returns  would  be  made.  We  told  him  the  importance 
of  having  in  as  much  money  as  possible  on  the  31st  of  July 
so  as  to  make  the  return  to  Councils  as  favorable  as  it  could 
be  made. 


147 


Q.  This  was  in  July  of  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  I  think  it  was  done  prior  to  that. 

Q.  Later  in  the  year  did  you  call  attention  to  the  necessity 
of  paying  the  money  in  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  whether  it  was  done  in  1885  or  not. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  recollect  any  other  matter  in  connection 
with  this  subject  w^here  you  communicated  with  the  Mayor's 
Department  urging  compliance  with  the  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  do.  I  think  it  was  the  third  week  in  July 
that  the  Mayor's  messenger  was  up  at  the  office.  I  told  him 
then ;  it  was  Captain  Leabourn  ;  he  was  there  receiving  some 
rolls  or  bills,  or  doing  some  business ;  I  asked  him  if  he  would 
not  please  give  the  Controller's  compliments  to  the  Mayor  and 
say  that  he  had  probably  forgotten  to  make  his  return  as  he 
had  promised,  and  tell  him  the  importance  of  having  it  in 
before  the  31st  of  July  so  that  the  statement  would  show  more 
than  $2.50  paid  by  the  Mayor's  Department.  Captain  Lea- 
bourne  afterwards  reported  to  me  before  the  31st  of  July  that 
he  had  told  it  to  the  Mayor,  and  that  the  Mayor  had  said  that 
he  would  attend  to  it. 

Q.  Now,  was  there  any  other  communication  on  the  subject  ? 

A.  We  had  some  communications  with  him  by  telephone,  or 
with  his  office,  when  it  was  reported  back  that  the  Mayor 
would  attend  to  it.  That  was  the  substance  of  the  communi- 
cations received.  On  the  31st  of  July  I  think,  about,  next — 
maybe  about  one  o'clock  I  telephoned  down,  after  consulting 
the  Controller,  because  we  always  kept  him  posted  about  such 
things — telephoned  to  the  Mayor's  office  telling  him  the  re- 
turn had  not  been  made,  and  that  our  books  would  close  that 
day,  and  that  his  Department  would  show  but  the  payment  of 
$2.50  in  the  City  Treasury,  and  that  we  did  not  think  it  would 
look  very  well.  We  asked  him  if  he  could  not  fix  it  up.  The 
reply  was  that  the  Mayor  was  just  getting  ready  to  go  to 
Atlantic  City  and  had  bundled  up  the  papers,  and  would  take 
them  along  and  make  his  return  immediately  upon  his  return. 


148 


My  recollection  is  that  he  said  he  would  make  a  payment  im- 
mediately on  his  return  as  of  the  31st  of  July,  so  as  to  get  in 
the  statement. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  any  other  instance  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not. 


Joseph  W.  Catherine^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law, 
testifies  as  follows  : 

By  Mr.  Roberts : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  receiving  teller  in  the  City  Treasurer's  office. 
By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  ? 

A.  I  am  the  receiving  teller  in  the  City  Treasurer's  office. 
Q.  That  is,  you  receive  the  moneys  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  From  all  the  departments  ? 

A.  From  all  sources ;  whatever  is  paid  into  the  City 
Treasury. 

Q.  Presume  that  the  Mayor's  messenger  has  come  in  with 
a  payment ;  what  do  you  do  ? 

A.  I  receive  the  money  and  enter  it  into  a  receipt  book, 
which  he  attests. 

Q.  Which  he  brings  ? 

A.  No  ;  into  our  receipt  book. 

Q.  Now,  get  your  books  and  turn  first  to  1886  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  books.) 

Q.  What  is  your  first  receipt  from  the  Mayor  in  1886  ? 

A.  $2.50  received. 

Q.  When? 

A.  February  first. 


149 


Q.  What  was  that  for  ? 
A.  The  sale  of  a  cow. 

Q.  What  is  your  next  receipt  from  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  On  August  20,  there  was  received  $400  for  pawnbroker's 
licenses,  and  $25  for  gunpowder  licenses. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Now,  next,  give  us  the  receipts  as  you  received  them  ? 
A.  August  21,     $200  00,  8  amusement  licenses. 

22,    2,300  00,  5  brokers'  licenses. 
"       24,        13  25,  bal.  on  sale  of  horse  and  wagon. 
"       24,      886  00,  redemption  of  dogs. 
"       24,        11  90,  fine  of  patrolmen. 
"  ^    24,    5,300  00,  pawnbrokers'  licenses. 
"       24,      670  00,  coal  oil  licenses. 
"       27,         2  38,  fine  of  patrolmen. 
"       31,      150  00,  theatrical  licenses. 
This  is  the  total  paid  for  1886. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Just  show  the  Committee  that  book  ? 

(The  witness  here  exhibits  to  the  Committee  the  book  to 
which  he  had  been  referring  in  giving  the  figures  of  the  re- 
ceipts from  the  Mayor's  office). 

Q.  In  this  book  you  require  the  person  paying  the  money 
to  sign.  For  instance,  here  is  a  receipt  (indicating  a  receipt). 
That  is  one  of  the  payments  by  the  Mayor,  is  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  require  the  signature  of  the  Mayor's  messenger  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  On  what  date  were  the  dog  fees  paid  in  ? 
A.  Redemption  of  dogs,  on  the  24th  of  August. 


150 


Q.  Tell  the  Committee  by  whom  the  money  was  paid  in  ? 

A.  By  John  Humphries. 

Q.  Do  you  know  him  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  know  him. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  relation  he  occupies  to  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  I  believe  he  is  a  messenger,  but  I  do  not  know  anything 
about  him.  He  signed  this  book  when  paying  the  money  into 
the  treasury. 

Q.  In  every  case,  when  you  receive  any  money  from  a  de- 
partment or  from  an  individual,  you  fill  up  this  receipt  (indi- 
cating the  book)? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  signed  by  the  Treasurer  and  also  by  the  person 
paying  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  attested  by  the  party  paying  the  money  into 
the  office. 

Q.  So  every  dollar  received  in  your  department  is  attested 
by  the  person  paying  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir, 

Q.  So  that  if  you  were  hereafter  to  say  we  did  not  receive 
$911.15  (indicating  the  receipt  in  the  book),  the  signature  of 
the  person  paying  it  would  attest  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  They  are  supposed  to  read  it  and  see  that  it 
is  correct. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  of  the  Mayor's  messengers  ? 
A.  No ;  I  cannot  say  that  I  know  any  of  them  personally. 
Q.  You  read  olF  the  amounts  that  you  had  received  from 
the  Mayor  during  this  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  they  foot  up  ? 
A.  $10,071.03. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  We  want  to  take  $150  off  that,  as  we  are  only  going  up 
to  the  27th  of  August.    That  would  leave  $9,921.03  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


151 


Q.  Those  moneys  were  all  received  on  the  dates  as  you 
have  received  it  ? 

A.  As  they  are  entered  in  the  book. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  The  Mayor,  in  his  statement  to  the  Committee,  says 
that  by  contract  entered  into  with  the  Womens'  Branch  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Ani- 
mals, etc. 

(Mr.  Lawrence  here  reads  from  the  communication  sent  by 
the  Mayor  to  the  Committee  on  Saturday,  the  4th  instant,  in 
relation  to  moneys  received  for  redemption  of  dogs  as  being 
paid  to  his  clerk,  Howard  March,  and  accounted  for  by  the 
said  March  to  the  City  Treasurer,  etc. 

•  Q.  (Mr.  Lawrence  continuing  his  question  after  reading 
from  the  communication).  Did  you  get  any  statement  from 
Mr.  March  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  All  I  could  tell  was  whether  it  was  Mr.  Marsh 
who  presented  it  to  us. 

Q.  It  might  have  been  sent  in  the  same  way  as  the  other 
money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  it  might  have  been  sent  by  a  messenger.  I 
could  not  tell  you  just  how,  but  can  tell  you  who  brought  the 
money. 

Q.  I  simply  wanted  to  know  whether  it  was  a  separate 
thing,  as  the  Mayor  speaks  in  his  communication  about  Mr. 
March  sending  it  to  himself. 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  it. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  On  what  date  was  it  you  received  the  fees  for  the  re- 
demption of  dogs  ? 

A.  On  the  24th  of  August. 


152 

Q.  Did  you  receive  any  moneys  for  that  purpose  on  any 
other  day  in  the  year? 

A.  No,  sir ;  that  is  the  only  item  for  the  redemption  of 
dogs. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  the  money  was  paid  in  cash 
or  by  check  ? 

A.  Sometimes  the  money  was  paid  by  check  and  sometimes 
in  cash. 


Robert  M.  Scott  recalled. 
Examination  by  Mr.  Bardsley. 

Q.  You  have  been  asked  to  ascertain  when  the  account  of 
William  B.  Smith,  Trustee,  was  closed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  has  not  been  closed  at  all  with  us.  It  is 
transferred  to  what  we  call  a  sundry  ledger.  We  sent  notices 
to  all  the  parties  to  close  out. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  deposit  made  on  that  account  ? 

A.  (Referring  to  statement.)    January  23,  1882. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  check  drawn  on  that  account  ? 
A.  November  11,  1882. 

Q.  Since  then  there  has  been  no  deposit  made  ? 

A.  No  deposit  has  been  made  since  then.  There  is  still  a 
balance  with  us  to  that  account. 

Q.  You  are  one  of  the  receiving  tellers  also  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  am  not  a  receiving  teller.  I  could  tell, 
however,  whether  checks  came  to  our  place. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  (Check  of  McGarry  and  of  Harvey  and  McGarry  shown 
witness.)  That  one  check  is  payable  to  the  order  of  City 
Treasurer  or  bearer.  We  have  been  told  that  the  word 
"  bearer  "  was  inserted  afterwards.  Could  that  change  have 
been  made  in  your  bank  ? 

A.  It  has  not  been  made  in  our  bank. 


153 


Q.  Was  the  alteration  on  this  check  (referring  to  another 
of  the  checks)  made  in  your  bank  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  it  was  not.  Those  alterations  on  these  checks 
were  not  made  in  our  office  at  all. 

Q.  You  would  not  receive  these  checks  on  deposit  unless 
they  had  been  endorsed  as  you  there  find  them  ? 

A..  No,  sir ;  we  would  not  have  received  them. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  Would  you  receive  these  checks  in  that  altered  condi- 
tion ? 

A.  W^hether  we  would  have  received  them  in  that  altered 
condition  ?  We  might  have  received  them  and  seen  whether 
the  bank  would  pay  them.  If  the  bank  had  paid  them,  we 
would  certainly  have  thought  them  all  right. 

Q.  The  check  shows  on  its  face  that  it  has  been  altered  ? 

A.  I  see  it  does. 

Q.  Would  your  receiving  teller  receive  a  check  when  it  had 
been  altered,  and  showed  so  palpably  that  it  had  been  altered, 
as  these  checks  show  ? 

A.  We  might  do  it  to  oblige  a  depositor. 

Q.  You  would  not  pay  a  depositor  money  on  a  check  altered 
like  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  • 

Q.  But  you  would  receive  it  and  place  it  to  the  credit  of  a 
depositor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  with  that  understanding,  that  if  the  bank 
paid,  it  would  be  all  right. 

Q.  You  think  that  check  went  into  your  bauk  in  that  altered 
condition  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  that. 

Q.  Who  could  say  so  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  any  one  could  say  so. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  to  find  out  whether  that  check 
when  it  was  presented  at  your  bank  was  in  that  altered  condi- 
20 


154 


tion, — whether  it  was  altered  after  leaving  the  hands  of  his 
Honor,  the  Mayor,  or  was  altered  before  it  left  his  hands  ? 
A.  We  could  not  tell  that. 

Q.  The  question  might  arise  that  the  check  was  altered  after 
it  had  been  paid  by  the  bank  and  come  back  to  the  drawer. 
A.  Very  true,  it  might ;  we  could  not  tell. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Do  you  remember  deposits  made  to  the  credit  of  the 
Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Large  amounts? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  they  consisted  of? 

A.  (Referring  to  deposit  slip.)  On  August  24th  there 
was  the  largest  deposit  made  of  $6070.  I  think  that  was  the 
largest  one. 

Q.  What  did  that  consist  of? 

A.  Five  thousand  six  huudred  and  seventy  dollars  in  bank 
check  of  $100,  and  one  check  of  $300. 

Q.  What  were  the  checks  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  the  checks  until  we  looked  up  our  old  de- 
posit tickets,  which  would  take  about  an  hour. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  largest  deposit  ? 
A.  Next  largest  was  $2,000.    I  did  not  bring  that  slip  ;  I 
was  told  to  bring  this. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  What  is  that  paper  you  have  in  your  hand  ? 
A.  That  is  the  deposit  slip  of  August  24. 

(The  paper  produced  by  the  witness — being  the  account  of 
^' Wm.  B.  Smith,  Trustee,"  was  as  follows: 


155 


William  B.  Smithy  Trustee^  in  account  with  the  Fidelity 
Ins.,  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Co. 
DR.  CR. 


1881 

1880 

April  17 

$100  00 

Dec.  8 

1882 

1882 

May  16 

115  00 

May  6 

17 

75  00 

June  23 

Nov.  11 

21  00 

1886 

Sept.  6 

24  GO 

$335  00 

By  cash. 


$135  00 

180  00 
20  00 


$335  00 


1886 
Sept. 


By  balance   $24  00 


At  this  point  in  the  proceedings,  upon  motion  of  Mr.  Clay, 
the  Committee  took  a  recess  for  one  hour. 


After  Recess. 

The  Committee  re-assembled  pursuant  to  the  order  for  a 
recess,  and  there  being  no  other  witnesses  present  to  examine, 
upon  motion  of  Mr.  Iseminger,  the  Committee  adjourned  to 
meet  to-morrow,  Tuesday  morning,  September  7,  1886,  at  10 
o'clock. 


j 
I 


i 

i 

1 
( 

I 


THIRD  DAY. 


SELECT  COUNCIL  CHAMBER. 


Philadelphia,  September  7,  1886. 

The  Committee  re-assembled  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.,  this  day, 
in  the  Chamber  of  Select  Council,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present : — Mr.-  Roberts  in  the  Chair ;  Mr.  Eckstein,  Clerk, 
and  the  following  members  of  the  Committee — Messrs.  Ed- 
wards, Bardsley,  Iseminger,  Claridge,  Clay,  Reinstine,  and 
Lawrence,  President  of  Common  Council :  of  Counsel — Mr. 
Warwick,  the  City  Solicitor ;  Messrs  Earle,  Brightly,  Ruddi- 
mam,  and  White,  as  representing  the  Mayor. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman.  I  desire  to  say  that  it  is  the  sense 
of  this  Committee  that  the  Mayor  should  be  heard  personally, 
or  by  Counsel  and  by  such  witnesses  as  he  may  designate, 
and  the  Committee  desire  that  he  shall  be  so  heard  to-morrow 
morning  at  10  o'clock.  It  Avill  give  the  Chair  pleasure,  as 
representing  the  Committee,  to  issue  orders  for  any  subpoenas 
desired  by  the  Mayor  or  his  Counsel. 

Mr.  White,  of  Counsel  for  the  Mayor.  I  want  to  say  a 
few  words  in  answer  to  what  has  been  just  said  by  the  Chair- 
man of  the  Committee,  which  has  taken  us  somewhat  by  sur- 
prise. A  few  thoughts  occurred  to  me  while  the  Chairman 
was  speaking,  which,  without  consultation  with  my  client,  I 
will  express.    When  this  Committee  commenced  its  labors, 

(157) 


158 


one  member  of  it  announced  that  it  was  the  desire  of  the  Com- 
mittee to  know  what  the  Mayor  had  to  say  about  the  charges 
made  against  him,  and  intimated  that  if  a  statement  came 
from  that  source  it  would  be  investigated,  and  that  it  might 
not  only  assist  the  Committee  in  their  labors,  but  perhaps  dis- 
pense with  any  further  proceedings.    Upon  that  intimation 
the  Mayor  made  a  full  statement,  which  was  furnished  to  this 
Committee,  relative  to  the  facts  involved,  and  giving  the  names 
of  persons  who  could  establish  or  refute  them.    That  answer 
of  the  Mayor  was  submitted  to  this  Committee.    At  that  time 
we  were  invited  to  take  part  in  this  investigation,  and  we  pro- 
posed so  to  do.    But  that  answer,  to  our  surprise,  instead  of 
being  the  first  thing  taken  up  and  investigated,  seems  to  have 
been  ignored  up  to  the  present  time.    In  place  of  calling  the 
Mayor  before  you  and  interrogating  him,  and  in  place  of  call- 
ing the  witnesses  whom  he  announced  had  full  cognizance  of 
the  facts,  this  investigation  has  proceeded  on  a  different  line. 
The  very  first  time  that  one  of  the  Mayor's  counsel  attempted 
to  exercise  the  right  we  were  invited  to  exercise,  of  testing  the 
accuracy  of  a  witness  who  had  been  called,  we  were  stopped 
and  informed  that  this  was  an  ex  parte  examination.  Now, 
I  desire  to  say  that  I  am  not  finding  fault  with  the  Committee 
for  taking  that  view.    I  do  not  say  but  that  they  are  right  in 
asserting  that  this  is  an  ex  parte  investigation,  but  I  do  desire 
to  say  that,  in  my  judgment,  it  would  be  a  farce,  after  the 
Committee  has  proceeded  so  far  in  its  labors  upon  the  line  of 
an  ex  parte  investigation,  shutting  out  the  party  from  all  his 
rights  whatever,  to  turn  around  now  and  attempt  to  turn  the 
investigation  into  a  judicial  examination,  and  ask  the  other 
side  to  come  in  and  make  a  defense  just  the  same  as  if  we  had 
been  permitted  to  do  so  from  the  very  first.    If  the  Committee 
will  allow  me  to  make  a  suggestion  as  to  what  seems  to  me  to 
be  regular  and  proper,  I  will  say  this,  this  is  an  ex  parte  in- 
vestigation, as  you  have  announced ;  but  when  I  look  upon 
the  membership  of  the  Committee  I  see  men  who  I  believe  to 
be  fair,  impartial  and  judicial.    I  see  men  upon  the  Committee 


159 


■whom  I  am  confident,  in  any  investigation  of  this  kind,  wilL 
scorn  to  allow  personal  enmity  or  personal  prejudices  to  influ- 
ence them  in  their  proceedings.  To  those  men  I  appeal,  and 
to  them  I  say,  that  having  invited  the  Mayor  to  make  a  state- 
ment, that  upon  them  it  lies  to  call  the  Mayor  before  them  and 
to  call  the  witnesses  whom  he  has  named  and  to  investigate 
their  statements,  to  hear  what  they  have  to  sa}^  in  the  same 
way  as  other  witnesses  have  been  called  who  were  named  or 
presented  by  one  whom  it  is  unnecessary  for  me  to  state.  You 
are  here  to  discharge  a  duty,  and  one  of  the  most  solemn  that 
w^as  ever  put  upon  the  same  number  of  gentlemen.  I  ask  you 
to  discharge  it  fairly,  and  to  call  the  chief  official  of  this  city, 
the  representative  of  this  great  city,  before  you,  if  you  have 
any  doubts  as  to  the  truth  of  his  statement,  and  to  call  the 
witnesses,  whose  names  he  has  given  you,  just  as  you  have 
called  other  witnesses  whose  names  have  been  furnished  you 
through  other  sources.  Of  course,  I  do  not  propose  to  bind 
my  client  without  consultation,  but  it  does  seem  to  me  that 
this  is  the  only  regular  course  for  the  Committee  to  pursue. 
It  would  not  have  been  possible  for  us,  after  we  were  told  it 
was  an  ex  parte  investigation,  to  come  in  and  place  ourselves 
before  this  community  as  a  party  having  a  fair  hearing.  You 
cannot,  after  half  the  case  is  tried,  and  after  a  fair  hearing  to 
the  other  side  has  been  denied,  ask  us  now  to  come  in  in  the 
way  suggested.  The  Mayor  has  tendered  himself  to  you  ;  he 
has  announced  that  he  is  within  the  call  of  the  gentlemen  of 
this  Committee,  and  on  you  is  the  responsibility  whether  you 
call  only  one  side  or  whether  you  call  both. 

Mr.  Bardsley  : — Mr.  Chairman,  if  I  properly  understood  the 
opening  remarks  of  Mr.  White,  they  were  to  the  effect  that  it 
is  for  the  members  of  this  Committe  to  intimate  that  they  have 
a  desire  to  hear  anything  that  the  Mayor  may  have  to  say,  either 
in  person,  or  through  Avitnesses.  The  object  of  the  announce- 
ment you  made  was  just  that,  nothing  more  or  less,  that  the 
Mayor  should  be  invited  by  this  Committee,  and  requested  to 
give  this  Committee  the  names  of  any  persons  he  desired  to 


have  called  in  connection  with  this  subject.  He  may  come 
himself  if  he  so  desires  and  submit  himself  to  such  examina- 
tion, as  the  Committee  may  see  proper.  He  may  not  come. 
He  may  send  the  names  of  his  witnesses  and  we  will  examine 
them.  If  I  understood  Mr.  White  aright,  he  said,  that  upon 
the  invitation  of  this  Committee  the  Mayor  presented  himself 
through  the  communication  presented  by  Mr.  Ruddiman,  and 
in  that  communication  he  gave  the  Committee  the  facts  and  the 
names  of  the  parties,  who  would  support  those  facts.  It  was 
on  my  own  motion  that  an  invitation  was  extended  to  the 
Mayor  to  make  any  commuication  he  might  see  proper  to  make 
and  I  used  these  words  :  "In  common  with  others  I  have  seen 
it  stated  in  the  papers  that  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  has  fre- 
quently said  that  the  charges  which  the  Clerk  has  just  referred 
to  were  not  true.  It  has  always  been  customary,  when  Com- 
mittees of  Councils  were  investigating  Departments  of  the  city, 
to  first  hear  from  the  party  charged  ;  because,  perhaps,  his 
explanation  may  be  entirely  satisfactory,  and  save  the  time  of 
the  Committee  as  well  as  the  time  of  the  witnesses.  Cases 
have  occurred  where  the  explanations  were  entirely  satisfac- 
tory. In  order  that  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  may  have  an  op- 
portunity now,  before  we  commence  the  examination  of  wit- 
nesses, I  would  suggest  that  you  invite  the  gentlemen  who 
represents  his  Honor  to  make  any  statements  looking  to  the  refu- 
tation of  the  charges  that  they  in  their  judgment  may  deem 
proper. ' '  Thereupon  Mr.  Ruddiman  thanked  the  Committee  and 
handed  in  the  communication.  In  that  communication  the  Mayor 
makes  no  request  for  the  examination  of  witnesses.  He  says, 
not  in  the  communication,  nor  by  word  of  mouth,  but  through 
his  counsel  "I  stand  ready  to  come  if  you  desire  me." 
There  is  nothing  in  the  communication  throwing  a  particle  of 
light  upon  the  charges  except  an  admission  of  the  amount  of 
money  he  had  already  paid  into  the  City  Treasury.  He  ad- 
mits other  matters  that  have  since  been  proven  to  be  true. 
Now,  this  Committee,  at  one  of  its  sessions  determined  that 
this  should  be  an  exparte  hearing.    Acting  under  the  advice 


161 


of  counsel,  it  was  deemed  unnecessary  to  prolong  the  investi- 
gation except  sufficiently  far  enough  to  determine  whether 
there  was  a  prima  facie  case  made  out,  and  if  there  was,  to 
make  a  report  to  Common  Council  that  articles  of  impeach- 
ment should  be  drawn  against  his  Honor,  the  Mayor.  If 
those  articles  should  be  drawn  and  presented  to  Select  Council, 
then  according  to  law  and  correct  practice,  the  Mayor  would 
have  an  opportunity  for  cross-examining  all  witnesses  just  the 
same  as  in  a  court  of  justice.  As  I  understand  it,  we  are  sit- 
ting practically  as  a  grand  jury.  But  we  are  not  bound  by 
rules  of  law  or  evidence,  but  bound  by  what  you  might  call 
common  sense.  The  investigation  has  reached  a  point  now 
when  we  have  passed  the  resolution  that  you,  Mr.  Chairman 
have  announced.  We  are  now  ready  to  hear  the  Mayor  in 
person,  or  by  any  witnesses  whose  names  he  may  give  to  you 
to  be  subpoenaed  before  the  Committee.  For  one,  it  shall 
never  be  said  of  me  that  anything  in  my  power  shall  be 
avoided  that  anything  shall  be  done  to  prevent  the  strongest 
refutation  of  the  charges  that  have  been  submitted  to  this 
Committee,  and  that  the  witnesses  have  been  called  to  present. 
I  do  not  want  the  Mayor,  or  his  counsel,  to  dream,  for  a 
moment,  that  this  Committee  will  shut  their  eyes,  or  refuse  to 
listen  to  anything  or  everything  that  may  come  ftom  his 
Honor,  the  Mayor.  His  communications  and  witnesses  shall 
be  treated  with  the  same  courtesy,  the  same  care,  the  same 
respect  as  the  witnesses  that  have  already  been  presented  be- 
fore this  Committee.  The  names  of  the  w^itnesses  were  given 
to  us,  and  th'ey  were  subpoenaed,  and  they  have  been  ex- 
amined. Now,  let  the  Mayor,  or  his  counsel  give  to  you,  sir, 
the  names  of  any-  witnesses  he  may  desire  to  have  examined, 
and  we  will  examine  them  as  well  as  we  may  be  able.  Not 
as  well  as  if  this  thing  comes  to  a  trial  before  Select  Council, 
because  then  they  will  be  crossed-examined  by  experts,  by 
members  of  the  Bar,  learned  in  the  law,  and  not  in  the  poor 
way  we  are  trying  to  do  it.  Now,  perhaps  we  ought  to  apolo- 
gize for  the  crude,  and  perhaps  irregular  manner  in  which  the 
21 


162 


examination  has  been  conducted,  but  we  want  it  distinctly  un- 
derstood, that  while  we  may  be  irregular  in  our  examination, 
we  desire  to  get  at  the  bottom  facts,  and  that  they  will  govern 
this  Committee  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  motive. 

Mr.  White :  The  member  of  the  Committee  who  has  just 
sat  down  said  that  this  Committee  is  acting  as  a  grand  jury. 
He  may  be  right,  as  a  grand  jury  is  a  body  who  listens  to 
witnesses  subpoenaed  against  a  man,  and  don't  listen  to  those 
in  his  favor.  But  I  don't  think  that  this  Committee  means 
to  intimate  what  the  gentlemen  himself  shows  that  he  don't 
mean.  He  does  admit  that  this  is  an  ex  parte  investigation. 
The  invitation  now  made,  that  we  shall  furnish  a  list  of  the 
persons  who  know  the  facts,  is  a  different  one  from  what  I 
first  understood.  When  the  Mayor  furnished  in  his  answer 
the  names  of  men  who  received  those  moneys,  or  those  checks, 
who  had  charge  of  them,  he  thought  that  he  had  furnished  the 
names  of  persons  who  would  at  once  be  called.  If  the  invita- 
tion is  that  he  will  furnish  the  names  of  persons  who  are  cog- 
nizant of  the  facts,  I  think  it  will  be  received  with  the  utmost 
thankfulness,  both  by  the  Mayor  and  his  counsel,  and  that 
such  a  list  will  be  furnished.  Of  course,  neither  the  Mayor 
Dor  his  counsel  can  take  the  position  of  having  a  full  hearing 
before  the  Committee,  when  that  has  been  already  denied. 
We  are  not  quarrelling  with  the  Committee  about  it,  but  we 
say  that  you  must  take  one  line  or  the  other,  and  proceed 
with  the  investigation  in  your  own  way.  You  are,  of  course, 
disposed  to  do  it  fairly.  That  is  to  say,  the  responsibility  is 
upon  you  to  show  that  you  are  investigating  both  sides  fairly. 
We  cannot,  in  the  first  place,  however,  be  told  that  we  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  examination  ;  that  it  is  ex  parte  ;  and 
be  told,  in  the  second  place,  that  we  should  put  ourselves  in 
the  position  of  having  it  said  that  we  had  a  full  and  fair 
hearing.  I  will  submit  the  proposition  now  made  to  my  client, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  list  such  as  the  Committee  now 
seem  to  desire  will  be  furnished.  Of  course  the  witnesses  are 
to  be  called  by  the  Committee,  and  not  by  us. 


163 


William  B.  Spittall,  being  duly  sworn  according   to  law, 
testified,  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  Did  you  serve  certain  subpoenaes  for  the  Committee? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  did. 

Q.  Were  they  served  by  you  personally  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


Howard  March,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  Clerk  for  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Did  you  ask  to  be  called  before  this  Committee  to  make 
a  certain  statement  ? 

A.  I  requested  to  be  called  before  the  Committee  as  a  wit- 
ness. I  was  writing  a  letter  for  the  Committee  when  I  re- 
ceived the  subpoena  yesterday  morning  abon  ten  o'clock. 

Q.  The  Committee  will  be  pleased  to  hear  any  statement 
you  may  desire  to  make. 

A.  I  want  to  make  a  statement  in  reference  to  the  recep- 
tion of  the  moneys  I  have  taken  in  since  I  have  been  in  the 
department.  In  doing  so  I  will  begin  at  the  beginning. 
When  I  was  appointed  to  the  position  I  hold  now,  by  the 
Mayor,  not  having  held  a  political  position  before,  and  know- 
ing nothing  about  the  duties  of  the  office,  I  called  upon,  on 
two  or  three  occasions,  or  visited,  my  predecessor  in  office, 
who  explained  to  me  the  mode  of  conducting  the  business, 
and  everything  that  he  could,  kindly,  amongst  which  things 
he  touched  the  question  of  money.    He-  said  that  there  were 


164 


always  occasions  requiring  the  expenditure  of  money  in  the 
office,  and  that  it  would  be  well  always  to  have  money  on 
hand  to  meet  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  department. 

Q.  Who  was  this  man  ? 

A,  My  predecessor  ?  A  2;entleman  named  Mr.  Jackson.  I 
explained  to  him  that  I  was  not  the  possessor  of  very  much 
money,  and  he  said  that  I  should  follow  the  precedent  of  some 
others,  and  in  regard  to  the  paying  of  that  over,  there  was  no 
specified  time  for  doing  it,  and  that  I  could  use  the  money  for 
the  incidental  expenses  of  the  department.  I  received  certain 
moneys  in  1884.  I  made  a  return  of  certain  moneys  to  the 
City  Treasurer  in  '84,  but  all  the  moneys  received  by  me  in 
'84  was  not  all  paid  in  in  '84. 

Q.  That  is,  it  is  still  in  your  hands  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  now  in  your  hands  certain  moneys  which  have 
not  been  paid  in  of  '84  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Received  on  behalf  of  the  city  ? 

A.  On  behalf  of  the  city  ?  Yes,  sir.  In  '85  I  received 
certain  moneys,  and  a  portion  of  that  money  is  still  in  my 
hands. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  are  speaking  now  of  '85  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  the  money  has  been  used,  or  a  portion  of  it, 
for  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  office.  I  cannot  tell  exact 
amounts.  The  warrant  drawn  to  my  order  in  '84  reached 
over  $600,  I  think  it  is,  and  in  '85  over  $800,  and  this  year, 
so  far,  it  is  something  over  $300.  The  money  I  have  on  hand 
now,  not  returned,  is  in  my  fire-proof  safe,  where  it  has  been 
always,  except  when  some  of  it  was  paid  out  for  incidental 
expenses.  Then  I  would  draw  a  warrant  for  the  amount  in 
my  own  name,  and  send  it  to  the  Controller,  and  when  I  got 
the  warrant  back,  I  would  pay  it  into  the  account,  so  as  to 


165 


keep  that  incidental  account  thoroughly.  It  has  never  been 
out  of  the  proof  except  on  these  occasions.  I  have  now 
$1,030  in  my  possession  in  my  fire-proof  safe.  I  hold  it 
there  because  I  thought  it  was  a  more  proper  place  ;  because, 
if  I  deposited  it  before  coming  here  and  setting  myself  right 
before  the  committee — I  thought  it  was  better  to  hold  it  rather 
than  to  deposit  it,  and  having  the  criticism  before  my  explana- 
tion was  given. 

Q.  As  I  understand  it,  then,  it  takes  a  certain  mount  of 
capital  to  run  the  department,  and  you  used  that  money  for 
that  purpose,  instead  of  waiting  for  the  money  to  come  in  ? 

A.  No ;  instead  of  using  my  own  personal  money. 

Q.  And  then  it  would  be  paid  back  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  are  always  express  packages  that  come 
into  the  office,  and  there  have  to  be  purchases  of  stamps,  which 
amounts  to  considerable,  and  then  there  are  the  monthly  news- 
papers, and  we  get  bills  monthly. 

Q.  You  have  to  pay  cash  for  these  things  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  advanced  the  money  ? 
A.  I  advanced  it  out  of  those  funds. 

Q.  Have  you  any  further  statement  to  make  ? 

A.  Well,  I  want  to  say  in  reference  to  not  turning  that 
money  in  when  I  turned  in  the  money  for  1886 — I  can  only 
say  as  I  told  you  a  few  minutes  ago,  I  did  not  return  it  be- 
cause I  thought  it  was  more  just  to  myself  to  come  here  and 
to  make  this  explanation  rather  than  to  deposit  that  money 
and  raise  a  criticism  against  myself,  when  I  would  not  have 
the  opportunity  to  make  a  personal  explanation. 

Q.  Where  did  you  turn  in  the  money  ? 
A.  To  the  Treasurer  direct. 

Q.  Not  to  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  The  Mayor  has  never  known  anything  personally  about 
my  accounts. 


166 


Q.  How  about  the  redemption  of  dogs  ? 
A.  That  is  the  money  I  am  speaking  of. 
Q.  Does  that  cover  all  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  is  very  little  other  money  received — 
some  police  fines  have  been  turned  in. 

Q.  Have  you  a  statement  of  the  receipts  of  those  moneys  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  several  small  books.) 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  How  much  have  you  in  your  possession  now  ? 
A.  One  thousand  and  thirty  dollars. 

Q.  You  have  closed  up  the  accounts  for  1886,  and  have 
something  of  1884  and  1885  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  any  agreement  with  the  dog-pound  people  in 
relation  to  the  collection  of  the  moneys  from  them  ? 

A.  There  is  a  contract  entered  into  every  year  by  the 
Womens  Branch  of  the  Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty 
to  Animals  and  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  and  one  of  the 
items  of  the  appropriation  reads  $3500  for  taking  up  and 
killing  dogs.  I  do  not  think  those  are  the  exact  words,  but 
that  is  what  it  means. 

Q.  Who  has  that  contract  ? 

A.  The  Womens  Branch  of  the  Society  for  the  Prevention 
of  Cruelty  to  Animals. 

Q.  Y^ou  have  not  got  the  contract  ? 

A.  No.  I  have  a  certain  copy  here  which  I  found  when  I 
went  into  the  office.  I  found  this  copy  there.  It  was  in  the 
office  when  I  took  possession,  and  I  judge  they  are  all  alike. 

(The  witness  here  produces  the  following  paper :) 

Whereas,  By  Ordinance  of  March  11,  1871,  the  Mayor 
of  the  City  of  Philadelphia  was  authorized  to  enter  into  a  con- 
tract with  "  The  Women's  Branch  of  the  Society  for  the 


167 


Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals,"  or  any  other  Society  or 
parties  for  the  taking  up,  killing,  and  removing  all  dogs  found 
running  at  large  in  the  City  for  the  year  1871. 

And  Whereas,  It  was  also  made  the  duty  of  the  Mayor 
in  the  month  of  December  of  each  year  thereafter  to  enter 
into  a  contract  with  some  society  or  parties  for  the  same  pur- 
pose, providing  the  appropriation  was  made. 

And  Wfiereas,  By  Ordinance  approved  February  12, 
1872,  the  Mayor  was  authorized  to  enter  into  such  contract 
for  the  then  current  year,  and  that  thereafter  he  should  have 
the  power  to  enter  into  such  contract  at  any  time  afterwards, 
when  such  appropriation  is  made. 

AxD  Whereas,  Such  appropriation  was  made  for  the  cur- 
rent year  upon  the  day  of  ,  A.  D.  187  . 

Notv,  therefore.  It  is  agreed  by  and  between  "  The  Women's 
Branch  of  the  Pennsylvania  Society  for  the  Prevention  of 
Cruelty  to  Animals,"  party  of  the  first  part,  and  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  party  of  the  second  part,  as  follows,  viz. : 

The  said  party  of  the  first  part,  in  consideration  of  the 
covenants  hereinafter  contained  on  the  part  of  the  said  party  of 
the  second  part,  covenants  and  agrees  to  seize,  take  up,  secure, 
and  safely  convey  all  dogs  found  running  at  large  in  the  City 
of  Philadelphia  in  violation  of  any  of  the  laws  or  ordinances 
of  the  said  City  during  the  present  year,  to  wit :  until  the  31st 
day  of  December  next,  inclusive,  and  the  said  dogs  safely  to 
convey  to  their  premises,  situate  on  the  Lamb  Tavern  Road, 
in  the  Twenty-eight  i  Ward  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  com- 
monly known  as  the  Dog  Pound,  and  said  dogs,  if  not  re- 
deemed within  the  term  and  in  the  manner  by  law  prescribed, 
then  and  there  to  kill  and  to  remove  and  dispose  of  the  car- 
casses of  said  dogs  so  as  aforesaid  killed  by  them  in  such 
manner  that  no  public  nuisance  shall  be  created  thereby.  And 
the  said  party  of  the  first  part  further  agrees  and  binds  itself  to 


168 


furnish,  employ  and  pay  the  requisite  and  usual  number  of 
men,  and  to  provide  the  horse,  dog  cart,  and  all  the  necessary 
and  usual  apperatns  required  for  the  purpose  of  capturing, 
keeping,  conveying,  and  killing  the  said  dogs,  the  City  to  be 
in  no  event  liable  for  the  pay  of  said  men,  or  for  the  horse,  cart, 
or  apparatus,  aforesaid,  or  for  any  expenses  connected  there- 
with. And  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  further  agrees  and 
binds  itself  to  pay  over  all  moneys  received  by  it  for  the  re- 
demption of  such  of  the  aforesaid  dogs  as  may  be  redeemed  ac- 
cording to  law,  to  such  officer  or  officers  as  the  Mayor  of  the 
said  City  may  designate. 

And  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  party  of  the  second  part,  in 
consideration  of  the  faithful  performance  by  the  party  of  the 
first  part  of  the  covenants  and  stipulations  above  mentioned 
and  set  forth,  agrees  to  pay  to  the  said  party  of  the  first  part 
the  sum  of  three  thousand  dollars  in  City  warrants,  drawn 
according  to  the  ordinances  of  said  City,  to  be  paid  in  twelve 
equal  monthly  instalments  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars 
each. 

In  witness  whereof,  The  said  party  of  the  first  part  hath 
hereunto  affixed  its  corporate  seal,  properly  attested  by  its 
President,  and  the  seal  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia  hath  been 
hereto  affixed,  properly  attested  by  the  Mayor  of  said  City 
this  day  of  ,  Anno  Domini  one  thousand  eight 

hundred  and  seventy. 
Signed,  sealed,  and  delivered 

in  the  presence  of  us. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  say  that  all  the  moneys  you  received  were  for  the 
redemption  of  dogs  and  for  the  fines  of  policemen  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  money  did  you  receive  for  the  redemption  of 
dogs  in  1884? 

A.  $1,140  was  the  total. 


169 


Q.  How  much  of  that  have  you  turned  into  the  City  Treas- 
urer ? 
A.  $810. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  receive  for  the  redemption  of  dogs 
in  1885  ? 

A.  $1,784  was  received. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  in  ? 
A.  $1,084. 

Q.  In  1886  how  much  did  you  receive  ? 
A.  Up  to  the  present  time  $1,148. 

Q.  How  much  have  you  turned  in  ? 
A.  $1,148. 

Q.  Then  you  have  turned  in  this  year  all  you  have  collected  ? 
A.  I  turned  it  in  the  day  after  the  City  Solicitor  gave  his 
opinion. 

Q.  From  what  other  sources  did  you  receive  money  in 
1884? 

A.  $37.34  for  some  goods  sold  by  Thomas  &  Sons,  at  auc- 
tion. 

Q.  Was  that  turned  into  the  Treasury  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  When? 

A.  On  the  8th  day  of  August. 

Q,  In  what  part  of  the  year  did  you  collect  it — when  did 
you  receive  it  ? 
A.  The  $34  ? 
Q.  Yes;  the  $37.34. 

A.  It  was  about  two  or  three  weeks  before  I  turned  it  in. 
Q.  Did  you  receive  money  from  any  other  sources  in  1884  ? 
A.  Not  in  1884. 

Q.  From  any  other  sources  in  1885  ? 

A.  I  was  handed  $30.94  for  police  fines.    That  was  re- 
turned on  December  18th. 
22 


170 


Q.  When  did  you  receive  that  money  ? 
A.  I  have  no  record  of  the  fines  I  received. 

Q.  That  you  paid  into  the  City  Treasury  in  1885  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  December  18th. 

Q.  Were  there  any  other  moneys  you  received  in  1885  ? 
A.  Not  in  1885. 

Q.  What  did  you  receive  in  1886  outside  of  the  moneys  for 
the  redemption  of  dogs  ? 
A.  $14.28  for  police  fines. 

Q.  Anything  else  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Sale  of  cow,  $2.50,  and  sale  of  horse  and 
wagon,  $13.25. 

Q.  Anything  else  ? 
A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  Has  that  all  been  turned  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  turn  this  money  or  fines,  and  the  money 
for  the  redemption  of  dogs,  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 

A.  On  August  24  I  returned  $886,  all  there  was  on  hand 
at  that  time. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  that,  by  cash  or  check  ? 
A.  In  cash. 

Q.  You  have  stated  to  the  Committee  that  your  reason  for 
retaining  the  money  in  your  possession  was  to  meet  the  inci- 
dental expenses  of  the  ofiice  ? 

A.  That  was  the  reason. 

Q.  Why  were  you  compelled  to  use  it  ? 
A.  I  was  not  compelled  to  use  it,  but  it  was  to  help  or  save 
my  own. 

Q.  What  necessity  was  there  for  using  your  own  ? 

A.  Well,  goods  have  got  t®  be  purchased.  For  instance,  if 
the  ofiice  requires  $30  or  $40  worth  of  stamps — that  cannot 
Ibe  had  without  the  money. 


171 


Q.  You  have  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  Councils  appropri- 
ated money  for  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  office  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  that  is  where  the  money  comes  from  ultimately 
to  reimburse  these  moneys  ;  I  draw  bills  against  Item  No.  23 
for  incidentals  in  my  own  name,  and  send  them  to  the  Con- 
troller and  get  the  warrants. 

Q.  Then  you  mean  to  say  to  the  Committee  that  this  was 
your  practice,  to  use  the  money  which  came  into  the  office,  and 
which  should  have  been  turned  into  the  City  Treasury,  for  the 
purposes  of  the  office,  and  reimburse  those  moneys  by  drawing 
warrants  against  Item  No.  23  for  incidentals  of  the  office  ? 

A.  That  is  about  the  thing. 

Q.  And  you  still  have  in  your  possession  moneys  collected 
as  far  back  as  1884  ? 

A.  1884  and  1885,  amounting  to  $1,030. 

Q.  Now  you  said  to  the  Committee  that  as  soon  as  the  City 
Solicitor  said  that  it  was  your  duty  to  pay  the  money  in  you 
turned  in  the  money  for  1886  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Why  didn't  you  turn  in  the  money  you  had  received  in 
the  preceding  years  ? 

A.  I  will  have  to  plead  ignorance  of  the  existence  of  an 
ordinance  requiring  the  return  of  money  on  any  specified  date. 
I  never  read  it  except  when  an  article  appeared  in  the  paper 
on  a  Sunday,  in  which  the  law  was  quoted.  I  got  thinking 
of  it  and  on  the  following  day,  on  Monday,  I  had  a  personal 
friend,  a  confidential  friend  of  mine,  who  came  into  the  office, 
and  I  took  him  to  one  side  and  explained  to  him  the  situation, 
and  I  said,  "  What  would  you  recommend  me  to  do — to  turn 
this  in  now,  or  would  you  recommend  me  to  hold  it  ?"  I  gave 
him  my  views,  that  if  I  paid  it  in  at  that  time  it  might  create 
an  unfavorable  opinion  of  me,  and  that  I  would  not  have  an 
opportunity  at  that  time  to  answer.  We  talked  some  time, 
and  he  said  that  it  was  his  idea  that  something  would  come  of 
this,  and  that  he  would  recommend  me  to  hold  it  until  such 
time  as  I  could  make  an  explanation  for  myself. 


172 


Q,  You  merely  turned  in  the  money  you  kad  received  for 
1886,  and  retained  the  moneys  for  1884  and  1885,  until  an 
opportunity  offered  to  make  a  personal  explanation,  such  as 
you  are  making  now  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  want  to  put  myself  right,  because  I  have 
not  done  anything  which  seemed  to  me  dishonest ;  possibly 
I  may  have,  and  I  know  now  that  I  have  broken  the  law,  but 
there  was  nothing  dishonest  in  my  doing  it. 

Q.  Where  were  all  these  moneys  kept  all  this  time  ? 

A.  In  my  fire  proof  safe. 

Q.  Were  they  there  at  all  times  ? 

A.  At  all  times,  except  when  drawn  out  in  these  small 
amounts  for  the  running  expenses ;  as  soon  as  the  money 
would  come  back  in  the  shape  of  warrants  I  w^ould  have  them 
cashed,  and  then  it  would  be  made  good. 

Q.  Well,  you  knew  that  the  only  way  in  which  to  pay  for 
the  incidentals  of  the  office  was  by  warrant  drawn  against  the 
proper  item  ? 

A.  Is  not  that  it  ? 

Q.  No.  It  was  your  duty  to  turn  into  the  Treasurer  any 
money  you  received,  and  if  you  needed  anything  for  the  pur- 
poses of  the  office  of  an  incidental  character  it  should  have 
been  paid  for  by  warrant  against  Item  23. 

A.  If  I  would  make  out  a  bill  for  a  certain  amount  of  money 
would  the  Controller  countersign  the  warrant  ? 

Q.  Yes  ;  if  it  was  accompanied  by  the  bill. 

A.  That  may  be  ;  but  they  wont  trust  you  for  stamps  and 
such  things  that  you  want  in  the  office. 

Q.  I  know  that  so  far  as  stamps  are  concerned  that  you  re- 
quire cash  and  do  not  get  a  bill.  But  as  to  the  other  goods 
that  are  procured  for  the  office  ? 

A.  There  are  some  things  that  we  could  have  got,  I  sup- 
pose, in  that  way.  There  is  no  doubt  about  it.  But  I  never 
gave  it  a  thought.  I  conducted  it  myself  in  the  same  way. 
I  did  not  think  that  I  was  doing  any  harm,  and  I  knew  that 
the  city  was  losing  nothing  by  it. 


173 


Mr.  Bardsley  :  I  understood  you  to  say  that  when  you 
read  the  City  Solicitor's  opinion  you  paid  over  to  the  City 
Treasurer  the  receipts  for  '86  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  If  the  City  Solicitor  had  not  given  that  opinion,  when 
would  you  have  paid  that  over  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  We  knew  that  the  City  Solicitor's  opin- 
ion had  been  asked  for,  and  I  therefore  waited  for  it. 

Q.  But  suppose  it  had  never  been  asked  for  ? 
A.  But  it  was  asked  for  ? 

Q.  When  did  you  intend  to  pay  this  money  over  to  the 
City  Treasurer  ? 

A.  Do  you  mean,  provided  that  there  had  been  nothing  of 
this  investigation  ? 

Q.  Yes,  sir. 

A.  I  would  have  returned  it  as  I  always  did. 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  you  never  have  returned  it  all  ? 
A.  No ;  because  that  was  the  capital  I  was  working  on  for 
the  office. 

Q.  When  would  you  have  returned  it? 

A.  Before  the  expiration  of  my  term.    I  cannot  say  when. 

Q.  Now,  when  you  read  the  City  Solicitor's  opinion,  which 
moved  you  to  pay  the  moneys  in  immediately  for  '86,  why 
didn't  it  move  you  to  pay  the  moneys  in  for  '84  and  '85  ? 

A.  As  I  have  explained,  after  taking  the  advice  of  my 
friend,  I  thought  it  better  to  hold  it  and  make  a  personal  ex- 
planation to  the  Committee,  or  whoever  was  appointed,  rather 
than  have  myself  criticized  before  the  explanation  was  given. 

Q.  You  were  afraid  it  would  hurt  you  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  that  there  would  be  some  reflection  against  you  ? 
A.  After  thinking  of  it,  I  thought  that  perhaps  there  might 
be  some  reflection. 


174 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  You  did  not  like  to  turn  it  in  under  fire? 
A.  I  did  not  say  that. 

Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  You  thought  you  had  better  wait  until  you  had  an  oppor- 
tunity of  making  a  public  explanation  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  yesterday  I  had  prepared  a  letter  to  the  Com- 
mittee, asking  them  to  give  me  an  opportunity  to  make  an  ex- 
planation when  I  was  subpoenaed  by  your  messenger,  Mr. 
Johnson. 

Q.  Now,  the  Mayor  did  not  know  anything  about  this  ? 
A.  The  Mayor  knew  nothing  of  this  business  whatever. 

Q.  The  Mayor  was  entirely  ignorant  of  this  irregularity  of 
yours  ? 

A.  Entirely  so,  if  you  call  it  an  irregularity. 

Q.  You  never  consulted  him  as  to  the  propriety  of  keeping 
this  money  on  hand  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  looked  at  that  as  one  or  the  minor  rules  of 
the  office. 

Q.  It  was  too  small  a  matter  to  trouble  him  w^ith  ?  You 
did  not  like  to  bother  him  with  talking  about  it  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  did  not  like  to  bother  him.  That  i& 
not  the  word. 

Q.  You  did  not  think  it  worth  while  to  let  him  know 
about  it  ? 

A.  I  took  it  as  one  of  the  rotine  duties  of  the  office.  I 
thought  it  was  all  right. 

Q.  And  he  knew  nothing  about  the  irregularity  ? 
A.  He  knew  nothing  about  it. 
Q.  So  that  he  is  innocent  of  that  ? 

A.  He  knows  nothing  of  my  accounts,  as  I  have  explained 
here  to-day,  and  does  not  know  about  it  to-day. 


175 


Q.  When  did  you  buy  these  books  ?  (Referring  to  books 
already  produced  by  witness.) 

A.  The  small  ones  were  purchased  in  the  years  when  the 
entries  are  made. 

Q.  But  they  look  new  ? 

A.  Because  they  have  been  but  little  used.  They  have 
been  in  my  fireproof  safe. 

Q.  You  thought  it  better  to  have  a  book  for  each  year  ? 

A.  I  thought  so.  I  always  kept  each  book  separately,  the 
same  as  the  Department  Ledger. 

Q.  Look  at  these  entries  (indicating  entries  in  books),  when 
did  you  make  them  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you  the  dates  of  them.  I  received  these 
moneys  in  a  lump  from  the  superintendent  of  the  dog  pound. 

Q.  "When  did  you  receive  these  moneys  ? 

A.  On  the  dates  set  opposite  to  them. 

Q.  When  did  you  put  them  down  in  the  book  ? 

A.  Now  I  will  explain  the  system  I  had.  As  a  rule  this 
money  would  be  received  by  me  in  the  middle  of  the  day. 
That  is  the  busiest  time  in  the  office.  Whatever  money  there 
was  I  always  took  it  and  placed  it  in  an  envelope,  and  put  on 
the  front  of  it  what  it  was  for,  together  with  the  date  and  the 
amount,  and  then  I  put  it  in  the  fire  proof  safe.  I  would 
enter  it  perhaps  that  night,  or  perhaps  not  for  a  couple  of 
nights,  or  a  couple  of  weeks.    It  laid  there  in  the  safe. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  that  these  entries  were  all  made  at  one 
time,  with  the  same  pen  and  same  ink  ? 

A.  I  know  they  were  not. 

Q.  Don't  it  look  so  ? 

A.  Not  to  ray  eyes,  because  I  know  they  were  not. 

Q.  You  have  some  experience  in  writing  I  presume.  Look 
at  the  entries  in  that  book  (indicating  a  book),  don't  they  look 
as  if  they  were  made  with  the  same  ink  and  the  same  pen, 
and  the  same  pressure — don't  they  have  the  same  general  ap- 
pearance, as  if  made  at  one  time  ?    But  you  say  they  were 


176 


not  so  made — that  thej  were  only  made  on  the  dates  set 
down  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  on  those  dates.  It  may  have  laid  in  the 
safe  a  couple  of  weeks. 

Q.  But  in  a  short  time  afterwards — a  week  or  a  coupie 
of  weeks  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  They  were  not  all  made  at  one  time  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  this  the  86  book  ?  (indicating  book.) 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  balanced  I  see  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  in  the  office  ? 

A.  To  superintend  the  clerical  work  of  the  department,  to 
see  that  it  is  done  correctly,  to  make  out  the  warrants  for  the 
police  officers ;  to  find  if  the  rolls  of  the  Police  Department 
are  correct,  and  to  pass  miscellaneous  bills ;  to  receive  them, 
and  to  draw  up  the  schedule  specifying  the  respective  items. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  the  appropriation  book  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  Then  you  are  practically  the  Chief  Clerk  ? 

A.  That  is  the  title  of  the  position  I  hold. 

Q.  Then,  it  is  your  duty  when  a  policeman  is  fined  to  col- 
lect that  fine  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Who  does  that  ? 

A.  It  comes  through  the  office  of  the  Chief  of  Police.  I 
know  nothing  of  it  until  it  is  handed  to  me. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  any  record  of  it  ? 
A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  Not  until  you  receive  it  ? 
A.  Not  until  I  receive  it. 


177 


Q.  Now,  turn  in  that  account  to  any  one  year — take  eighty- 
four  first.    What  was  collected  in  that  year  for  fines  ? 

A.  None  in  eighty-four.  The  system  was  not  inaugurated 
until  eighty-five. 

Q.  Well,  take  eighty-five.  How  much  was  collected  for 
fines  in  the  year  eighty-five? 

A.  Thirty  dollars  and  ninety-four  cents. 

Q.  That  is  all  the  fines  of  the  entire  police  force  of  the 
City  of  Philadelphia  for  that  year  ? 

A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief. 

Q.  Now  for  1886,  how  much  has  been  collected  on  that  ac- 
count ? 

A.  Fourteen  dollars  and  twenty-eight  cents  has  been 
returned. 

Q.  So  far  this  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  For  the  entire  police  force  of  the  city  ? 
A.  That  is  what  has  been  returned  to  me. 
Q.  The  lieutenants  collect  the  fines  and  hand  the  money 
over  to  the  Chief? 

A.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  system. 

Q.  Who  levies  the  fines  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  ;  that  comes  in  the  office  of  the  Chief  of 
Police ;  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  force,  except  what  I 
have  said. 

Q.  Whenever  there  are  assessments  of  the  police  force,  do 
you  collect  that  money  ? 

A.  I  never  knew  of  an  assessment. 

Q.  Whenever  there  are  contributions  asked  of  the  men,  do 
you  collect  of  them  ? 

A.  Not  of  the  men  individually. 

Q.  You  collect  then  of  the  lieutenants  ? 
A.  There  was  one  occusion  when  the  contributings  of  persons 
of  the  Department  were  handed  to  me. 
23 


178 


Q.  Now,  sometime  ago  the  police  force  were  armed  with  new 
revolvers,  and  every  man  got  a  new  revolver  at  a  cost  of  some 
$8  or  $9  apiece  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  the  cost.  I  know  they  were  armed  with 
new  revolvers. 

Q.  Who  collected  the  money  for  that  ? 

A.  I  have  not  the  slightest  idea. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  anyting  about  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  know  that  they  got  them  ? 

A.  From  hearsay  of  the  officers  in  my  own  district,  and 
other  officers  I  know  it. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  who  paid  for  them,  or  how  they  were 
paid  for,  or  whether  they  are  paid  for  ? 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  them. 

Q.  Your  duties  as  chief  clerk  would  not  bring  you  into  con- 
tact with  that  part  of  the  business  ? 

A.  That  belongs  to  the  office  of  the  chief  of  police  thor- 
oughly.   I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that  office. 

Q.  You  have  no  connection  with  it  at  all  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Except  to  receive  whatever  money  is  handed  to  you  in 
that  way 

A.  That  IS  all. 

Q.  Now,  after  making  your  explanation  to  the  Committee, 
it  is  your  intention  to  pay  over  that  money  to  the  City  Treas- 
urer immediately  ? 

A.  If  I  had  my  way  it  would  be  in  the  office  in  half  an 
hour.  I  will  do  whatever  you  tell  me  to  do.  I  have  made 
the  explanation. 

Q.  It  is  one  thousand  and  thirty  dollars  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


179 


Q.  What  does  that  sum  represent  ? 
A.  It  is  from  redemption  of  dogs. 
Q.  All  dogs  ? 

A.  It  came  out  of  that.  The  other  small  items  have  been 
returned. 

Q.  Then  the  $1,030  belong  to  the  money  collected  from 
the  redemption  of  dogs  ? 

A.  That  is  where  I  got  it  from. 

Q.  So,  in  being  returned  to  the  City  Treasury  it  would  be 
returned  to  that  account  only.  It  represents  the  receipts 
under  this  agreement  (indicating  the  agreement  between  the 
City  and  the  Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals, 
already  introduced  by  the  witness)  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  the  other  moneys  have  been  returned  and 
accounted  for. 

Q.  Except  this  balance  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  this  balance  belongs  wholly  under  this  contract, 
(referring  to  the  agreement)  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Who  makes  the  bank  deposits  for  your  department  ? 
A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  the  department  has  no 
bank  deposit. 

Q.  Who  has  been  making  the  deposits  to  the  credit  of  Wm. 
B.  Smith,  the  Treasurer  ? 

A.  I  have  not  the  slightest  idea.  I  have  nothing  to  do 
with  any  moneys  excepting  these. 

Q.  Cannot  you  tell  us  what  subordinate  of  the  office  is 
charged  with  the  duty  of  carrying  to  bank  the  deposits  ? 

A.  I  don't  know ;  I  never  saw  the  Mayor  make  a  deposit  in 
my  life,  nor  any  one  in  the  office ;  my  room  is  separated  from 
his  by  two  rooms. 


180 


By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Your  office  is  the  one  to  the  side  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  it  does  not  bring  you  into  contact  with  the  thorough- 
fare through  the  office,  so  that  Major  Linton  could  come  and 
make  deposits  without  your  knowledge  ? 

A.  My  office  is  here  (indicating  a  position),  and  Major 
Linton's  is  there  (indicating  another  position). 

Q.  Your  duties  are  entirely  separate  from  that  office  ? 

A.  Entirely  separate. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  a  bank  account  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  ? 

A.  I  never  did. 

Q.  What  acquaintance  have  you  with  the  payrolls  of  the 
Department — what  have  you  to  do  with  them  ? 

A.  The  payrolls  come  to  me  about  the  twentieth  of  the 
month. 

Q.  From  the  lieutenants? 

A,  Yes,  sir  ;  each  lieutenant  has  his  payroll  made  out ;  they 
come  to  me  about  the  twentieth  of  the  month  with  the  names 
of  the  men  on,  to  enable  me  to  make  out  the  warrants. 

Q.  What  do  the  pay  rolls  contain  ? 

A.  The  names  of  the  men  in  the  department. 

Q.  Nothing  else  ? 

A.  No. 

Q.  Not  the  time  ? 

A.  Not  then.  They  are  sent  back,  and  then  the  time  is 
put  in,  and  they  are  returned  toward  the  last  part  of  the 
month,  or  perhaps  before  that,  and  the  time  is  in. 

Q.  But  you  cannot  fill  up  the  warrants  until  the  last  of  the 
month  ? 

A.  Not  until  the  last  of  the  month.  But  the  name  of  the 
party  is  in  already.    They  go  back  then  to  have  the  time  put 


181 


in.  The  calculations  are  made  by  the  lieutenants.  The  man's 
time  is  taken — the  number  of  days  he  has  made — and  then  the 
calculation  is  made  in  dollars  and  cents.  They  make  the  cal- 
culations when  they  make  out  the  rolls,  and  they  come  to  me 
and  I  verify  them ;  so  that  they  are  correct. 

Q.  Then  you  fill  in  the  amount  of  the  warrant? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  the  warrants? 

A.  Send  them  to  the  Controllea  in  bulk  to  countersign  ; 
then  they  are  returned  to  me,  and  then  I  deliver  them  over — 
the  warrants  of  every  district  to  the  lieutenant,  and  take  his 
receipt  for  them. 

Q.  You  take  his  receipt  in  bulk  ? 

A.  In  bulk  for  the  district  warrants. 

Q.  Are  you  conversant  with  the  names  of  the  men  on  the 
pay-rolls  ? 

A.  The  personel  of  the  pay-rolls,  I  don't  know.  I  don't 
suppose  that  I  know  50  of  the  men  in  the  City.  Eaeh  dis- 
trict is  allowed  so  many  officers,  and  those  officers  can  make  so 
much  time  in  a  month.  I  verify  the  rolls — see  that  the  ac- 
counts are  not  overdrawn. 

Q.  Those  warrants  are  charged  up  against  Item  10  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  the  end  of  last  year,  can  you  remember  what  the 
balance  was  to  the  credit  of  that  item  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you  now  without  reference. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  said  you  had  never  received  contributions  from  any 
of  the  men  ? 

A.  I  said  personally  from  any  of  the  officers. 

Q.  Have  you  received  contributions  or  assessments  from  the 
lieutenants  ? 

A.  I  never  received  any  assessment.  The  department  never 
had  any. 


182 


Q.  What  about  contributions — have  you  ever  received  them  ? 
A.  I  have  had  some  moneys  contributed,  handed  to  me. 
Q.  By  whom  ? 

A.  Well,  by  some  of  the  parties  in  the  office,  together  with 
some  of  the  lieutenants. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  any  money  as  contributions  from  the 
lieutenants  in  1885,  as  coming  from  their  districts  ? 

A.  That  I  really  cannot  say  positively. 

Q.  When  can  you  recollect  that  you  did  receive  any  ? 

A.  From  some  persons  in  the  department.  A  great  many 
of  them,  the  same  as  myself,  make  contributions  for  the  elec- 
tions, which  I  think  it  is  right  for  any  man  to  do.  He  has 
his  position,  and  he  ought  to  contribute  to  the  party. 

Q.  But  I  mean  from  the  entire  force  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that  the  entire  force  ever  made  a  con- 
tribution. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  tell  the  Committee  that  you  are  igno- 
rant of  the  fact  that  the  lieutenants  in  certain  districts  have 
said  over  their  dsks  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  men  to  con- 
tribute ;  that  so  much  money  was  needed,  and  that  the  money 
was  contributed  ? 

A.  Of  that  fact  I  am  thoroughly  ignorant ;  it  is  seldom 
that  I  ever  go  into  a  station-house ;  I  don't  suppose  that  I 
have  been  in  five  of  them  outside  of  the  last  visitation  of  the 
police  Committee. 

Q.  These  contributions  you  speak  of,  what  do  they  amount 
to? 

A.  In  total? 

Q.  Yes. 

A.  I  don't  know,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  You  stated  that  you  kept  a  separate  incidental  account. 
Did  you  not  say  that  ? 

A.  No ;  I  said  that  I  spent  the  money  for  the  incidental 
expenses  of  the  office. 


183 


Q.  You  have  a  separate  incidental  account  ? 
A.  For  the  receipts,  not  the  expenses. 

Q.  Is  there  anybody  to  audit  that  account  ? 
A.  The  Controller  always  audits  it,  I  suppose^  before  coun- 
tersigninor  a  warrant. 

Q.  You  made  no  returns  to  anybody  of  the  receipts  for 
1884,  '85,  but  1886  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  were  audited  by  the  auditors  of  the  Con- 
troller's office. 

Q.  Now,  about  the  receipts  ? 

A.  I  am  speaking  of  the  receipts,  the  receipts  in  1885. 
The  auditors  of  the  Controller's  office  called  there  with  a 
memorandum  of  the  moneys  paid  in  by  our  department  to  the 
City  Treasury.  I  showed  them  my  receipt  book,  and  it  cor- 
responded with  theirs.    That  was  the  audit  in  1886. 

Q.  That  is  for  the  amount  of  money  that  you  did  turn  in. 
I  am  speaking  of  the  money  you  did  not  turn  in  ? 
A.  That  has  never  been  audited. 

Q.  You  kept  that  money  of  your  own  volition  without 
knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Thoroughly. 

Q.  You  have  occupied  your  position  as  chief  clerk  in  the 
department  for  how  long  ? 

A.  Since  the  7th  of  April,  1884. 

Q.  Who  authorized  you  to  keep  the  city's  money  ? 

A.  No  one. 

Q.  You  were  holding  the  relation  of  chief  clerk  to  the  chief 
executive  officer  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  and  knew  it  was 
his  duty  to  turn  into  the  city  treasury  all  the  money,  and  yet 
you,  without  any  authority  whatever,  withheld  the  city's 
money  on  your  own  account  ? 

A.  I  held  it  on  my  own  account. 


184 


Q.  Do  you  think  that  you  performed  your  duty  loyally  to 
your  chief? 

A.  I  don't  think  now  that  I  did.  But  at  the  time  I  did 
not  think  I  did  anything  to  bring  a  blush  of  shame  to  him  on 
account  of  my  actions. 

Q.  But  when  you  saw  in  the  papers  a  quotation  of  the  law, 
you  consulted  with  an  intimate  friend  as  to  what  you  should 
do.  Why  did  you  not  then  consult  with  your  chief,  the 
Mayor  ? 

A.  Well,  I  thought  I  would  rather  place  my  case  before  a 
gentleman  that  I  had  the  utmost  confidence  in. 

Q.  Then  you  thought  more  of  your  reputation  than  of  that 
of  your  chief? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  have  never  made  a  return  for  1884  and  1885  ? 
A.  Not  of  the  balance  that  I  have  in  hand. 
Q.  No  one  knows  you  have  got  that  except  by  the  strate- 
ment  you  have  made  this  morning  ? 
A.  That  is  it. 
Q.  Not  even  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Not  even  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Did  it  not  never  occur  to  you  that  you  were  giving 
cause  for  reflection  upon  the  Mayor  ! 
A.  Since  this  started  ? 
Q.  At  any  time  ? 

A.  I  never  thought  of  it  before  this  thing  started,  but 
since  then  I  thought  that  he  had  better  not  know  it.  I  did  it 
myself,  and  I  thought  that  he  had  better  not  know  it ;  that  he 
would  not  worry  over  it. 

Q.  You  thought  it  right  to  open  a  personal  account  of  your 
own  with  the  City  of  Philadelphia's  money  ?  You  used  the 
money  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia  to  pay  the  incidentals  ? 

A.  The  incidental  city  bills. 

Q.  How  is  it  that  the  warrant — we  will  say  for  October — 
was  not  sufficient  to  pay  for  those  things  for  October  ?  Ad- 


185 


mitting  that  it  was  necessary  that  you  should  have  a  certain^ 
amount  of  money  to  pay  some  expenses  during  October,  1884, 
how  is  it  that  the  warrant  that  you  received  from  the  City 
Treasurer  did  not  compensate  for  the  amount  you  had  ex- 
pended ? 

A.  I  don't  understand  the  question. 

Q.  I  mean  the  money  that  you  received  for  the  expendi- 
tures? 

A.  My  incidental  bills  ? 

Q.  Suppose  that  you  spent  $125  from  the  fund  for  inci- 
dental expenses  of  the  office  in  October,  1884,  you  would  draw 
a  warrant  for  $125,  and  receive  the  money  at  the  end  of  the 
month  ? 

A.  Not  at  the  end  of  the  month — whenever  the  schedule 
was  signed  by  the  Police  Committee. 
Q.  That  is  usually  once  a  month  ? 
A.  Once  or  twice  a  month. 

Q.  Now,  if  you  received  that  $125  at  the  end  of  October 
to  compensate  you  for  what  you  had  expended,  why  was  it 
necessary  to  be  continually  adding  to  this  amount  ? 

A.  I  hardly  know  hew  to  explain  it.  I  did  it  without 
giving  any  thought  whatever  to  it.  I  kept  it  there  not 
knowing  what  might  come  up.  It  was  done  thoughtlessly; 
that  is,  in  reference  to  that  amount. 

Q,  You  still  allowed  the  amount  to  accumulate  month  after 
month  and  year  after  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  did  it  without  giving  it  any  thought. 

Q.  And  without  the  Mayor's  knowledge  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then,  after  you  found  out  that  you  ought  to  have 
turned  this  money  over  to  the  City  Treasurer,  you  did  not 
consult  with  the  Mayor,  but  called  in  a  confidential  friend  ? 

A.  I  did  not  call  him  in  ;  he  came  into  my  office,  and  I 
consulted  with  him.  I  would  now  like  to  say  to  the  Commit- 
tee that  if  you  want  me  for  anything  else  I  will  be  in  my 
office. 

24 


186 

George  H.  McCaugkin,  being  duly  affirmed,  according  to  law, 
testifies  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  '! 

A.  At  the  city  pound  and  shelter. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  superintendent  of  the  same. 

Q.  Do  you  receive  any  moneys  there  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  For  the  redemption  of  dogs  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  Do  you  receive  any  other  moneys  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  do  you  do  with  these  moneys  after  you  get  them  ? 
A.  I  turn  them  over  to  Howard  March. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  the  position  ? 

A.  I  have  been  in  full  charge  since  the  17th  of  April,  '85. 

Q.  Have  you  got  a  statement  of  the  moneys  received  from 
those  sources  and  paid  over  to  Howard  March  ? 

A.  I  have  a  copy  here  of  this  year,  and  the  others  are 
printed  in  pamphlet  form  every  year  by  the  society — a  state- 
ment of  the  moneys  received  at  the  pound  for  various  purposes, 
for  the  sale  of  dogs  and  sale  of  manure,  and  donations  they 
may  receive  from  private  parties,  and  redemption  of  dogs. 

Q.  Have  you  an  agreement  between  the  society  and  the 
city  ? 

A.  That  belongs  to  the  society.  I  am  merely  one  of  their 
servants. 

Q.  Have  you  a  statement  of  the  moneys  paid  over  to  How- 
ard March  ? 

A.  I  have  for  this  year. 


Q.  Since  April,  1885  ? 

A.  You  will  find  the  statement  for  1885  in  pamphlet  form 
— that  is,  in  lump. 

Q.  Have  you  got  it  here  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    I  have  it  for  this  year. 

(The  witness  here  produces  papers.) 

Q.  These  (indicating  papers)  appear  to  be  Howard  March's 
receipts  for  certain  payments  you  have  made  for  1886  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  They  cover  up  from  the  1st  of  January,  1886, 
until  the  1st  of  September,  1886. 

Q.  Here  is  one  dated  September  4, 1886  (indicating  paper)  ? 

A.  That  is  the  date  it  was  paid.  Understand  me,  I  don't 
always  get  in  at  the  end  of  the  month.  The  end  of  the  month 
may  fall  on  a  Wednesday  or  Tuesday,  and  I  am  not  in  the 
habit  of  coming  in  to  see  our  Secretary  and  Treasurer  and 
President  until,  as  it  sometimes  happens,  on  Friday.  Then, 
just  as  soon  as  I  draw  money  I  pay  it  over  to  Howard  March. 

Q.  These  (indicating  papers)  comprise  all  you  have  paid  to 
Howard  March  up  to  the  date  mentiond  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir." 

Q.  Have  you  the  receipts  which  you  received  from  him  for 
1885? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  Please  produce  them  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  receipts.) 

Q.  These  (indicating  receipts)  comprise  all  the  moneys  you 
paid  him  during  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    The  sum  total  is  $1,784,  I  think. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  What  has  been  your  practice  in  making  payments  to 
Mr.  March — in  check  or  in  cash  ? 
A.  I  paid  him  in  cash. 
Q.  Always  ? 
A.  Always  in  cash. 


188 


Bj  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  What  do  the  receipts  amount  to  for  '85  ? 
A.  $1,784. 

Q.  When  were  you  appointed  ? 

A.  The  first  of  April,  1885,  I  was  appointed  assistant,  and 
took  charge  as  superidtendent  on  the  17th  of  the  same  month. 
Mr.  Morrett  was  the  superintendent  up  to  the  17th  of  April, 
1885. 

Q.  Who  appointed  you  ? 

A.  The  Women's  Branch  of  the  S.  P.  C.  A. 

Q.  Do  you  make  returns  to  that  Society  of  the  moneys  you 
pay  over  to  the  Mayor's  office  ? 

A.  I  do.  We  receive  a  duplicate  receipt  like  that  (indica- 
ting a  receipt). 

Q.  So  they  know  exactly  what  you  pay  in  ? 
A.  They  know  every  cent  paid. 

Q.  How  often  do  you  pay  this  money  into  the  Mayor's 
office  ? 

A.  Generally  once  a  month.  There  is  one  receipt  there  on 
the  12th  and  one  on  the  13th  of  August,  one  for  $210,  and 
one  for  $234.  That  was  when  Mr.  March  was  not  in  the  City. 
I  did  not  see  him  to  pay  it  to  him.  He  was  away  on  his  va- 
cation. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  get  two  receipts  on  the  same  date  ? 
A.  It  was  done  in  that  way  so  that  we  might  know  the- 
amounts  for  the  different  months. 

Q.  This  is  for  the  month  of  June  (indicating  a  receipt)  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  it  is  dated  August  13th  ? 
A.  That  is  the  date  I  received  it. 
Q.  Why  didn't  you  pay  it  before  ? 

A.  I  could  not  pay  it  before,  because  the  man  was  away» 
Q.  So  you  paid  them  both  on  the  same  day  and  took  sepa- 
rate receipts  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


189 

Q.  So  as  to  keep  the  months  separate  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  hand  to  the  Society  a  duplicate  receipt  ? 
A.  I  do. 

By  Mr.  Claridge  : 

Q.  I  believe  you  said  that  you  generally  pay  Mr.  March 
in  cash  ? 

A.  I  always. 

Q.  What  did  he  do  with  the  money  ? 

A.  He  generally  put  it  in  an  envelope — a  large  envelope 
like  an  official  envelope  and  wrote  on  it — always  wrote  some- 
thing on  it.  I  remember  of  seeing  on  two  or  three  occasions 
the  words,  "Redemption  of  Dogs,"  and  the  amount  and  the 
date.  But  I  got  so  used  to  it  I  didn't  bother  about  it.  All 
I  wanted  was  my  receipt  when  I  paid  over  the  money. 

Q.  He  has  already  told  us  that  he  put  the  money  in  an  en- 
velope ? 

A.  So  he  did.  He  put  it  in  an  envelope  and  wrote  on  the 
back  of  it.  Two  or  three  times  I  noticed  it — "  Redemption 
of  Dogs,"  and  the  month  and  the  amount.  Then  he  placed 
the  envelope  with  the  money  inside  in  a  little  compartment  in 
his  safe.  He  has  a  large  safe  in  his  office,  and  there  is  a  small 
compartment,  about  this  square  (indicating  with  his  hands). 
He  would  put  it  in  there  and  close  it  up. 

Q.  He  has  already  informed  the  Committee  of  that,  and  I 
wanted  to  know  whether  you  saw  him  do  it  ? 
A.  I  did,  most  emphatically  I  saw  him  do  it. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Were  there  any  moneys  received  prior  to  your  appoint- 
ment in  '85  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  $86.  I  received  $100  from  the  17th 
of  April  until  the  end  of  April,  and  then  I  think  $86  was  re- 
ceived by  Mr.  Morrett,  and  he  has  his  receipt. 


190 


Q.  How  much  was  received  in  '85  ? 
A.  $1,784. 

Q.  And  how  much  was  received  in  '86  ? 
A.  Up  to  September,  $1,148.» 

Q.  And  how  much  to  the  first  of  August  ? 
A.  $886. 


Mrs^  Elizabeth  Deviyie  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  laWy 
testified  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 
A.  1810  Stiles  street. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Daniel  Rosenthal  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  go  on  his  bond  as  pawnbroker  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  it  ? 

A.  The  first  Sabbath  of  January.  I  went  to  his  house, 
and  he  asked  me  if  I  would  go  on  his  bond. 

Q.  Of  what  year  ? 

A.  Last  January.  I  went  on  it  last  year  also.  I  said  yes. 
I  went  down  to  see  a  marriage  that  was  going  to  take  place  in 
his  family.  He  said  "I  am  going  to  pay  my  license  this 
coming  week."  I  said,  "very  well."  He  said  "you  can 
come  down  any  day  when  it  suits  you."  Well  I  came  down 
in  the  early  part  of  the  week — not  the  first  day,  but  about  the 
second.  When  I  went  into  the  Mayor's  office,  where  I  went 
before  when  I  went  on  his  bond.  Major  Linton  was  not  in.  I 
took  a  seat  and  waited  for  him.  He  came  in  directly  after  I 
got  in,  and  Mr.  Rosenthal  went  to  his  desk.  I  sat  in  a  chair, 
and  after  I  was  in  there  a  little  bit  he  called  me  up  to  the 


191 


desk.  He  asked  me  "  are  jou  going  to  go  on  Mr.  Rosenthal's 
bond?"  I  said  "Yes."  Do  you  own  real  estate?"  I  said 
"Yes."  "Is  it  encumbered?"  I  said  "No,  and  I  am  a 
widow  lady." 

Q.  Well,  you  went  on  his  bond  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  see  him  pay  for  his  license  ? 

A.  I  seen  money  laying  on  the  counter ;  I  was  sitting  on 
the  chair  ;  I  was  opposite,  and  the  desk  was  between  us  ;  when 
I  went  to  sign  my  name  on  the  bond,  then  I  seen  this  pile  of 
money  laying  along  side  the  desk  ;  I  put  my  signature  on  his 
book,  and  I  would  know  my  signature  wherever  I  would  see 
it ;  as  we  came  out,  he  bid  Mr.  Rosenthal  some  time  of  day, 
and  he  said,  "All  right  Mr.  Rosenthal." 

Q.  Who  said  that  ? 

A.  Major  Linton ;  as  I  came  down  the  stairs  I  said  to  Mr. 
Rosenthal,  "Are  you  all  right?"  and  he  said,  "Yes,  and  I  will 
get  my  license  in  a  few^  days." 

Q.  All  we  want  to  know  is  did  you  see  him  pay  the  money? 

A.  I  saw  the  money  on  the  desk  along  side. 

Q.  Y^ou  and  Major  Linton  and  Mr.  Rosenthal  were  the  only 
ones  there  ? 

A.  No ;  his  brother  was  there  also ;  he  saw  the  same  pile 
of  money  that  I  did. 

Q.  Was  that  money  there  when  you  went  in  there. 

A.  I  did  not  go  in  there  until  I  was  called  to  sign  the  bond, 
and  then  I  seen  the  pile  of  notes  there ;  I  should  suppose  I 
would  not  be  called  on  to  sign  the  bond  if  he  had  not  paid  his 
money,  and  the  clerk  would  not  have  said  "All  right  Mr. 
Rosenthal,  I  will  send  you  " — I  suppose  it  must  have  been  his 
license. 

By  Mr.  Claridge. 

Q.  Then  you  really  never  saw  Mr.  Rosenthal  pay  the 
money  ?  You  only  suppose  ? 

A.  It  is  not  a  supposition  ;  I  am  confident  he  paid  the 
money,  because  nobody  was  in  the  office  when  we  w^ent  in ;  we 


192 


liad  to  wait  for  the  messengor  to  come  in ;  we  were  the  two 
earliest  applicants  there  ;  and  then  he  asked  him  this  question, 
and  he  would  not  if  he  hadn't  the  money ;  I  saw  the  money 
laying  on  the  desk. 

Q.  But  you  really  do  not  know  whether  he  ever  paid  the 
money  ? 

A.  I  would  be  qualified  that  he  paid  the  money. 

Q.  How  could  you  be  qualified  that  he  paid  it  when  you 
did  not  see  him  ? 

A.  I  am  sure  that  the  money  was  not  there  when  we  went  in. 

Q.  How  could  you  be  sure  about  that  when  you  were  not  in 
the  room  ? 

A.  I  was  in  the  room.  I  went  in  the  room  in  the  first 
place,  and  then  took  a  seat  and  waited  until  he  came  in.  Be- 
fore he  came  in,  I  looked  around  and  looked  at  the  desk,  and 
there  was  no  money  there ;  but  when  he  came  in  and  called 
me  up,  I  seen  the  money. 

Q.  But  you  really  did  not  see  him  pay  the  money  ? 

A.  I  did  not,  because  I  was  not  called  up  until  the  money 
was  paid.  But  I  seen  it  there,  and  I  know  it  was  not  there 
when  I  went  in,  because  generally  I  look  around  me.  I  saw 
no  money  on  the  desk. 

Q.  It  might  have  been  there  covered  over  ? 

A.  It  is  not  likely  it  was  covered  over.  I  look  around 
pretty  sharp.    I  did  not  see  any  money  covered  up. 

Mr.  Bardsley. — The  other  day  when  Mr.  Rosenthal  was  on 
the  stand,  giving  the  same  character  of  testimony  as  this  lady 
has  been  giving,  Mr.  Ruddiman,  of  counsel  for  the  Mayor, 
commenced  to  cross-examine  the  witness.  You  will  remember 
I  took  the  liberty  of  objecting  to  it,  because  we  thought  it  was 
wrong.  I  have  since  learned  from  counsel  for  the  Mayor  that 
their  only  object  at  that  time  in  cross-examining  the  witness, 
was  to  endeavor  to  satisfy  themselves  as  to  the  payment  of 
this  $100. 

If  the  Mayor  should  be  convinced  from  the  witnesses  that 
the  $100  was  actually  paid  in  the  office,  he  proposes  to  assume 


193 


it  and  pay  it  to  the  City.  Counsel  thought  it  might  assist 
them  in  arriving  at  a  just  conclusion  on  that  particular  point, 
by  cross-examining  the  witness.  I  did  not  learn  of  this  until 
afterwards,  when  I  was  so  informed  by  Mr.  Brightly. 

Now,  I  would  suggest  that  if  counsel  for  the  Mayor  desire 
to  cross-examine  this  lady,  they  should  have  the  right  to  do  so. 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  There  is  no  objection  to  that 
Do  you  wish  to  cross-examine  the  witness,  Mr.  White  ?  (ad- 
dreesing  Mr.  White,  of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith.) 

Mr.  White :  No,  sir.  Mr.  Ruddiman  is  now  absent,  and  I 
know  nothing  about  the  subject.    I  have  no  questions  to  ask. 


Solomon  Linse,  recalled. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mrs.  Etta  Hyman  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  What  business  has  she  been  engaged  in  ? 

A.  Pawnbroking. 

Q.  When  did  she  give  it  up  ? 

A.  This  spring. 

Q.  How  long  had  she  been  at  it  ? 
A.  Some  years. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  her  paying  for  a  license 
this  year  ? 

A.  Well,  I  met  her  in  the  office  the  same  day  I  paid  my 
license. 

Q.  In  what  office  ? 
A.  In  Major  Linton's  office. 
Q.  Did  she  pay  her  license  ? 
A.  I  seen  her  and  the  bondsman  sign  the  book. 
Q.  Did  you  see  her  pay  any  money  ? 
A.  I  did  not. 
25 


/ 


194 

Q.  And  you  do  not  know  whether  she  paid  the  money  or 
not? 

A. .  I  could  not  positively  say. 

Q.  You  merely  know  that  the  bond  was  executed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  her  bondsman  and  herself,  I  seen  them  sign. 
I  presume,  of  course,  it  was  a  bond.  It  was  a  book  similar  to 
what  I  had  signed. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  know  anything  about  her  paying  the 
money  ? 

A.  No. 

By  Mr.  Reinstine : 

Q.  Is  it  the  custom  to  pay  the  money  before  the  bond  is 
executed,  or  to  pay  the  money  after  the  bond  is  executed  ? 

A.  The  usual  custom  is  to  pay  the  money  at  the  same  time 
the  bond  is  executed. 

Q.  The  bond  is  of  no  value  unless  the  money  has  been 
paid  ? 

A.  I  should  judge  they  would  not  take  the  bond  without  tlie 
money. 


Thomas  B.  Lovatt,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 
Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  My  residence  is  No.  224  Lombard  street. 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  An  auctioneer. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mrs.  Etta  Hyman  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  What  business  was  she  engaged  in  ? 
A.  She  was  then  in  the  pawnbroking  business  in  South 
street. 


195 


Q.  What  do  you  know  about  her  paying  for  a  license  in  the 
early  part  of  the  year  ? 

A.  Well,  I  happened  to  be  present  in  Major  Linton's  office 
that  morning  when  she  came  in,  I  saw  her  go  to  Major  Lin- 
ton, and  I  saw  her  bondsman  sign  his  name  on  the  bond,  and 
I  saw  her  take  out  her  pocketbook,  and  saw  her  take  money 
out  of  it.  Then  my  attention  was  attracted  to  another  part 
of  the  room  and  I  turned  my  head  around.  I  suppose,  of 
course,  that  she  paid  the  money. 

Q.  But  you  did  not  see  her  pay  it  ? 

A.  I  did  not  see  her  give  it  to  Major  Linton,  but  I  saw  her 
take  the  money  out  of  her  porte-monnaie.  After  that  I 
walked  down  the  street  with  her  as  far  as  Walnut  street,  and 
on  the  way  she  made  a  ramark  to  me  which  satisfied  me  that 
she  had  paid  the  money. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  What  was  the  remark  ? 

A.  That  the  gratuitous  fee  of  $5,  which  most  of  the  brokers 
gave  to  Linton,  she  did  not  pay.  She  said  she  thought  that 
$100  was  sufficient,  and  I  did  not  give  Linton  no  present. 

By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  see  her  pay  the  money,  and  you  only 
suppose  it  from  her  taking  money  out  of  her  pocket-book  that 
she  intended  to  pay  ? 

A.  That's  about  it.  But  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  the 
money  was  paid.  I  have  been  there  on  former  occasions,  and 
I  never  saw  anybody  sign  a  bond  until  the  money  was  paid. 


J.  Lewis  Crew^  being  duly  affirmed,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  I  am  in  tho  petroleum  business. 


196 


Q.  Wholesale  or  retail  ? 
A.  Wholesale. 
Q.  Where? 

A.  At  113  Arch  street. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  a  license  for  the  privilege  of  conducting 
your  business  ? 
A.  We  did. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  it  in  1885,  last  year  ? 

A.  I  have  not  examined  for  that  purpose.  My  subpoena 
only  called  for  1886. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  license  for  1886  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  do  it  ? 

A.  The  cash  book  shows  it  to  be  January  8th. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  it  in  cash,  or  by  check  ? 

A.  My  cashier  informs  me  that  it  was  paid  in  cash. 

Q.  How  much  was  it  ? 

A.  $20. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  fee  in  addition  to  it  ? 
A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  pay  this  money  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  that,  for  the  clerk  who  attended  to  it  is 
now  in  our  branch  office  in  New  York.  The  answers  I  have 
given  are  the  ones  from  the  cash  book. 

By  Mr.  Reinstine : 

Q.  There  was  a  receipt  given  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  but  in  the  fire  in  January  many  of  our  papers 
were  destroyed.    I  have  looked  for  it,  but  I  could  not  find  it. 

Q.  Has  any  license  been  given  ? 
A.  Not  this  year. 

Q.  In  former  years  you  had  them  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  very  soon  after  the  application.  The  usual 
mode  wag  to  send  the  money,  and  then  the  fire  marshal  would 


197 


come  down  in  two  or  three  days  and  make  examination  of  the 
premises,  and  if  everything  was  in  accordance  with  the  require- 
ments the  license  would  be  sent  in  two  or  three  days  after- 
ward. 

Q.  You  paid  this  money  in  January  last  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  have  no  license  up  to  this  date  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Have  you  asked  for  a  license  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  because  the  clerk  who  attended  to  that 
in  May  or  June  went  to  the  New  York  office. 


James  S.  Stevenson^  being  duly  affirmed,  according  to  law, 
testified  as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  in  the  oil  business. 

Q.  Wholesale  or  retail  ? 

A.  Both. 

Q.  Whereabouts 

A.  No.  132  South  Second  street. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  a  license  in  1885  for  the  privilege  of  con- 
ducting your  business  ? 
A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Did  you  go  on  conducting  business  without  a  license  ? 
A.  Without  a  coal  oil  license  ? 
Q.  Yes. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  license  in  1886  ? 
A.  I  did. 


198 


Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  ? 
A.  On  February  26th. 
Q.  How  much  did  you  pay  ? 
A.  $15. 

Q.  In  cash,  or  by  check  ? 

A.  By  check. 

Q.  Please  produce  it  ? 

(The  witness  here  produces  a  check). 

Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  beyotid  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 
.  Q.  No  fee  in  connection  with  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Beinstine: 

Q.  Have  you  received  your  license  yet  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  paid  in  February  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Last  year  you  had  no  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  license  this  year  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


William  Richardson^  being  duly  afl&rmed,  according  to  law, 
testified  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  The  oil  business. 
Q.  Wholesale  or  retail  ? 
A.  Both. 

Q.  Where  are  you  located  ? 
A.  No.  2  Chestnut  street. 


i 


199 

Q.  Did  you  pay  anything  for  a  license  in  1885  ? 
A.  Not  an  oil  license. 

Q.  Did  you,  in  1886  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  ? 
A.  $20. 

Q.  That  covered  the  wholesale  and  retail  both  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay,  by  check  or  in  cash  ? 
A.  In  cash. 

Q.  Have  you  got  a  license  ? 
A.  No,  sir  ;  not  yet. 

Q.  Have  you  asked  for  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  this  money  paid  for  the  business  in  your  own  name, 
or  in  somebody  else's  name  ? 

A.  For  the  Alpha  Oil  Company. 

Q.  You  are  testifying  about  a  license  paid  for  by  that  com- 
pany, and  not  about  a  license  taken  out  in  your  own  name  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    I  am  the  treasurer  of  the  company. 

Mr.  Clay  :  I  move  that  the  Committee  retire  for  consulta- 
tion before  we  proceed  any  further  in  this  examination. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay, 
It  was  agreed  to. 

Whereupon  the  Committee  retired  into  the  Chamber  of 
Common  Council  for  consultation. 

Upon  returning  to  the  Committee  room 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  :  The  chair  will  announce  that  the 
remainder  of  the  coal  oil  witnesses  are  excused. 


1 


200 


Col.  Robert  P.  Dechert^  recalled  : 

Examination  by^Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Can  you  tell  the  Committee  how  much  money  was  paid 
to  special  officer  William  Lang? 

A.  He  first  appears  on  the  police  pay  rolls  in  February, 
1885,  and  he  last  appears  in  May,  1886.  I  said  in  my  testi- 
mony yesterday  that  the  name  had  disappeared  in  August,  and 
I  supposed  then  that  it  was  so ;  but  an  examination  shows 
that  the  name  was  not  on  either  the  June  or  July  rolls.  I 
have  brought  these  rolls  here. 

(The  witness  here  produces  papers.) 

Q.  How  much  was  paid  him  up  to  that  time  ?  We  wish  to 
inquire  in  regard  to  the  following :  William  Lang,  W.  R. 
Baldwin,  Joseph  R.  Ash,  Warren  King,  John  F.  Smith,  A.  K. 
Gray,  and  Reserve  Officer  Geiger? 

A.  Very  well ;  I  am  prepared  now  to  answer  with  regard  to 
all  except  Smith  and  Baldwin.  I  was  not  heretofore  informed 
about  those.  Warren  King  was  on  the  roll  from  August,  1884, 
to  December,  1885.  In  1884  he  received  $1,384.14,  and  in 
1885  he  received  $908.70.  In  the  case  of  Geiger,  whose 
name  appears  on  the  July  and  August  rolls  of  the  present 
year  as  not  doing  any  time,  he  has  therefore  received  no  pay. 

He  appears  on  the  rolls,  but  as  not  doing  any  time. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  When  does  his  name  appear  ? 
A.  It  appears  on  the  August  rolls. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 
Q.  How  about  July  ? 

A.  It  is  the  same  in  July ;  but  he  drew  no  money,  as  he 
had  no  time.  Now,  as  to  Joseph  Ash.  He  had  9  days  time 
in  May,  1886,  as  a  substitute,  and  received  for  it  $21.42.  In 
June  he  received,  including  his  clothing  warrant,  $75.78. 


4 


201 

Bv  Mr.  Clav  : 
•/  •> 

Q.  What  did  he  get  for  clothing  ? 

A.  $4.33  and  $71.40  for  pay,  making  the  total  I  havegiven^ 
you.    In  July  he  received  $73.78. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  How  much  was  for  clothing  ? 

A.  Nothing  ;  that  was  all  pay.  In  August  there  was  a 
claim  of  $78  on  the  pay  roll,  but  the  warrant  has  not  been 
signed.  Now,  as  to  Gray.  He  first  appears  on  the  roll  in^ 
January,  1886,  and  is  borne  continuously  up  to  August  of  the- 
present  year.  Gray  received  in  January,  1886,  $73.78  ;  in 
February  he  received  $66.64;  in  March,  $73.78  ;  in  April, 
$71.40 ;  in  May,  $73.78  ;  in  June,  $28  for  clothing  and 
$71.40  for  pay,  making  $91.40;  in  July,  $73.78;  and  in- 
August  there  was  a  claim  for  $73.78,  but  the  warrant  has  not 
been  signed. 

By  Mr.  Edwards : 

Q.  You  have  withheld  your  signature  from  from  the  warrant  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  hold  it  in  my  office.  As  soon  as  I  return  to 
my  office  I  will  prepare  a  statement  about  the  cases  of  Smith 
and  Baldwin.    Lang  received  in  1885,  $823.53. 

Q.  Do^es  that  include  clothing  warrants  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  How  much  did  he  get  for  clothing  ? 

A.  Of  the  amount  given  for  1885,  $35.75  was  for  clothing. 

Q.  In  1886  ? 

A.  $342.72,  not  including  any  clothing. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Was  your  attention  ever  called  to  what  is  known  as  dog 
money — that  is,  money  received  for  the  redemption  of  dogs  ? 

A.  Only  as  having  been  paid  in  by  the  Mayor  to  the  Cit^ 
Treasurer. 
26 


202 

Q.  You  had  no  check  or  certificate  from  the  society  that 
collects  this  money  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  learned  the  other  day  that  the  dog  catchers 
have  printed  receipts,  which  they  fill  up  and  give  to  persons 
who  pay  them  money  on  the  streets.  That  was  the  first 
knowledge  I  had  of  it,  and  I  made  up  my  mind  that  I  would 
look  it  up  and  have  that  portion  of  the  account  audited. 

Mr.  Bardsley :  The  society  that  has  charge  of  the  work 
employs  an  officer,  and  he  collects  the  money  and  pays  it  over 
to  the  Mayor,  receiving  receipts  in  duplicate,  one  of  which  he 
hands  to  the  society,  and  keeps  the  other.  Of  that  money  the 
Chief  Clerk  of  the  Mayor  to-day  acknowledges  to  the  Com- 
mittee that  he  has  $1,030,  collected  in  1884  and  1885,  yet  in 
his  possession,  which  he  proposes  to  turn  over  immediately  to- 
day to  the  City  Treasurer. 

Colonel  Dechert :  That  is  the  first  I  heard  of  it. 

Mr.  Bardsley:  I  merely  call  your  attention  to  it,  so  that 
hereafter  you  may  have  that  account  audited. 


■Joseph  R.  Ash,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  Chairman : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  a  police  officer. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  No.  1109  Charlotte  street. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  on  the  police  force  ? 

A.  Since  the  22d  of  May. 

Q.  Of  this  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


203 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Are  you  on  it  now? 
A.  I  am  supposed  to  be. 

Q.  Why  do  you  say  "  supposed  to  be  "  ? 

A.  I  am.    But  I  am  not  doing  any  duty  while  here. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  you  are  on  the  force  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Of  course  you  are  not  in  uniform  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  in  uniform  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  a  uniform  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  This  is  all  the  uniform  I  have,  (indicating 
his  clothing.) 

Q.  During  this  time  you  have  drawn  a  certain  amount  for 
clothing.    I  believe  it  is  customary  ? 
A.  I  believe  so. 

Q.  Whether  you  buy  a  uniform  or  not,  you  draw  the  money  ? 
A.  I  suppose  so.    I  have  not  been  on  long  enough  to  know. 
Q.  Are  you  on  as  a  regular  or  as  a  sub  ? 
A.  As  a  special  officer  to  Capt.  Quirk. 
Q.  To  do  what? 

A.  To  enforce  the  different  ordinances. 

Q.  And  you  have  been  continously  on  since  May  22d. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  order  to  perform  that  duty,  it  is  not  necessary  to  be 
dressed  in  uniform  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  what  city  ordinances  have  you  enforced  ? 
A.  Such  as  blockading  pavements,  and  in  looking  after  fur- 
niture car  licenses. 

Q.  That  line  of  duty  takes  you  all  over,  I  suppose  ? 
A.  North  of  Poplar  street  and  east  of  Broad  street. 


204 


Q.  You  are  on  duty  during  the  day  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  from  about  8  o'clock  to  6  or  7. 

Q.  You  say  from  eight  o'clock  to  six  or  seven  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  During  that  time,  every  day,  you  are  on  duty  north  of 
Poplar  street  ? 

A.  Sometimes  I  have  to  come  down  to  the  Central. 

Q.  To  report  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  arrested  anybody  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  there  has  been  no  occasion. 

Q.  You  have  not  found  it  necessary  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  A  word  of  caution  has  been  sufficient  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  better  than  arresting  these  people  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  report  at  special  periods  at  the  Central  ? 
A.  Not  always ;  sometimes  I  report  at  Tenth  and  Thomp- 
son streets. 

Q.  Is  that  the  district  on  the  pay  roll  of  which  you  are  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  I  am  on  the  Fifteenth  District. 

Q.  Where  is  that  ? 
A.  Out  at  Frankford. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  why  you  are  on  the  Frankford  District 
pay  roll  ? 

A.  I  suppose  there  was  no  vacancy  anywhere  else  when  I 
was  appointed. 

Q.  Of  course  the  Mayor  has  the  right,  wherever  there  is  a 
vacancy,  to  appoint  a  special  officer  ? 
A.  I  suppose  so. 


205 


W.  B.  Baldwin,  being  duly  sworn,  testified  as  follows : 
Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 
A.  Frankford. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  a  special  officer  in  the  Fifteenth  District,  under 
Lieutenant  Dungan. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.  Two  years  and  one  month,  the  first  of  this  month. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  ? 

A.  I  am  detailed  for  special  duty  in  weighing  coal  for 
station-houses  at  the  present  time. 

Q.  All  the  station-houses  in  the  city  ? 
A.  All  the  houses  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  German- 
town,  Manayunk,  Chestnut  Hill,  and  all  around. 

Q.  How  much  of  your  time  is  taken  up  with  this  work  ? 
A.  When  I  am  at  it,  it  is  taken  up  pretty  much  every  day 
in  the  week.    Some  weeks  it  does  not  take  all  the  time. 

Q.  You  are  not  at  it  all  the  time  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  on  some  days  they  do  not  haul — coal  men. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  in  the  summer  season  the  Police 
Department  purchases  its  coal  for  the  entire  season  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  is  the  idea. 

Q.  What  do  you  do,  then  ?  For  instance,  in  the  months  of 
October,  November,  December,  January,  and  February  last, 
what  did  you  do  ? 

A.  I  was  putting  in  coal  last  year,  weighing  coal. 

Q.  In  those  months  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


206 


Q.  But  I  thought  you  said  the  bulk  of  the  coal  was  put  in 
during  the  summer  months  ? 
A.  That  was  last  year. 
Q.  How  is  it  this  year  ? 

A.  They  commenced  this  year  on  the  25th  of  June  to 
put  it  in. 

Q.  When  will  they  get  through  ? 
A.  That  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  How  is  it  regulated  ?  How  many  station-houses  are 
there  ? 

A.  Twenty-six. 

Q.  How  many  tons  of  coal  go  into  each  one  ? 
A.  Some  have  30  and  some  40,  45,  and  50. 

Q.  How  long  do  you  take  to  weigh  30  or  40  tons  of  coal? 

A.  If  it  is  all  hauled  in  a  day  I  can  do  it  in  a  day,  but  it 
may  take  two  days  to  do  it. 

Q.  How  long  did  it  take  you  to  weigh  up  and  see  put  into 
the  cellar  thirty  or  forty  tons  of  coal? 

A.  For  instance  I  put  in,  in  the  First  District  forty  tons  in 
one  day. 

Q.  That  is  all  they  sent  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  was  the  last  for  a  year  or  about  twelve  months  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  was  one  day  ? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  Now  take  another  district  ? 

A.  In  the  Second  District  I  was  about  two  days. 

Q.  Take  another  district — any  district? 
A.  For  instance,  I  went  to  the  Falls  of  Schuylkill  to  put 
in  ten  tons,  and  I  had  to  go  there  two  days  to  do  it. 

Q.  To  put  in  ten  tons  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


207 


Q.  How  was  that  ? 

A.  Because  thej  wanted  me  to  come  out  at  noon,  but  I  was 
engaged  at  the  other  yard  here  and  could  not  come  out  until 
three  o'clock,  and  so  I  had  to  go  back  the  next  morning  to 
finish  it. 

Q.  On  an  average  in  the  districts  it  would  be  about  two  days  ? 
A.  Two  or  three  days. 

Q.  But  the  average  would  be  about  two  days  ? 
A.  It  would  be  all  that,  if  not  more. 

Q.  Then,  for  twenty-five  districts  it  would  be  fifty  days  ? 
Now,  what  other  duties  were  you  performing  on  the  three 
hundred  odd  days  of  the  year  ? 

A.  When  I  commenced  putting  in  coal  this  year,  I  was  su- 
perintending the  pavement  around  the  station  house  in  the 
Fifteenth  District  at  Frankford. 

Q.  When  you  were  putting  coal  in  ? 

A.  When  I  commenced  putting  it  in. 

Q.  Then  you  stopped  putting  in  coal  ? 

A.  No,  I  stopped  superintending  that  job.  I  left  that 
and  went  to  putting  in  coal. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  at  laying  the  pavement  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know ;  about  three  weeks,  I  think. 

Q.  Then  you  stopped  that  and  went  to  putting  in  coal  ? 

A.  I  left  that  to  be  finished  by  some  one  else,  and  went  to 
putting  in  coal. 

Q.  How  long  have  yon  been  on  duty  as  a  patrolman  ? 

A.  Two  years  and  one  month. 

Q.  You  are  a  patrolman  detailed  for  special  duty  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  been  detailed  for  any  other  duty  excepting 
putting  in  coal  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  have  superintended  putting  up  the  fences 
around  the  station-houses  by  order  of  the  Mayor,  and  super- 
intended putting  up  the  fences  in  the  Twenty-fourth  District. 


208 


Q.  How  long  were  you  in  your  own  district  superintend- 
ing putting  up  fences  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know. 
Q.  About  how  long  ? 
A.  Nearly  a  month  altogether. 
Q.  What  kind  of  fence  was  it  ? 
A.  An  iron  fence  part  of  it,  and  part  of  it  wood. 
Q.  You  say  a  month  ? 
A.  We  were  over  three  weeks. 
Q.  Was  it  a  contract  job  or  day's  work  ? 
A.  A  contract  job. 

Q.  And  you  say  the  contractor  was  three  weeks  ? 
A.  On  the  two  fences. 

Q.  And  you  superintended,  seeing  that  it  was  done  accord- 
ing to  contract  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  Lieutenant  was  there  on  duty  every  day  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  addition  to  that  you  superintended  putting  up  fences 
where  ? 

A.  At  Bellgrade  and  Richmond  streets. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  there  ? 
A.  About  a  week. 

Q.  That  is  about  twelve  weeks  altogether,  as  I  make  it  out 
of  the  52.  That  leaves  40  weeks.  What  were  you  doing 
those  40  weeks  ? 

A.  Are  you  speaking  of  this  year  ?  I  superintended  dig- 
ging out  around  the  station  house  and  sodding  and  gravelling, 
superintended  the  digging  out  the  roadway  around  and  filling 
in.  After  I  got  that  work  all  done  I  went  to  work  fixing  up 
the  station  house  last  winter,  and  was  at  it  until  spring, 

Q.  You  used  to  be  the  Lieutenant  there,  I  think  ? 
A.  I  was  the  Lieutenant  there  twelve  years  and  seven 
months. 


209 


Q.  Then  you  were  under  several  Mayors  ? 
A.  Mayor  Stokley  and  King  and  the  presant  Mayor  ? 
Q.  You  gave  entire  satisfaction,  of  course,  or  you  would  not 
have  been  there. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  were  you  removed  ? 

A.  The  only  explanation  the  Mayor  gave  was,  he  said  that 
he  wanted  a  younger  man.  Never  was  a  scratch  of  a  pen  or 
any  charge  against  me. 

Q.  He  only  wanted  a  younger  man  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  he  had  enough  sympathy  for  you  to  find  you 
this  job  ? 

A.  He  offered  me  the  job  of  superintending  any  work  where 
it  was  contract. 

Q.  There  never  was  such  a  position  before  in  the  depart- 
ment ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  The  sergeant  under  me  was  detailed  to  build  a  station- 
house  out  there  by  Mayor  King. 

Q.  But  so  far  as  you  know,  there  never  was  a  man  perform- 
ing the  duty  that  yon  are  presumed  to  perform  ?  Whom  do 
you  report  to  ? 

A.  Lieutenant  Dungan. 

■Q.  Every  day  ? 

A.  If  I  am  not  down  in  the  city  putting  in  coal,  I  do. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 
A.  In  Frankford. 

Q.  You  have  always  lived  there  ? 

A.  I  have  lived  there  twenty-six  years. 

Q.  Is  it  customary  for  special  officers  to  draw  clothing  war- 
rants ? 

A.  I  believe  it  is  now,  at  the  present  time  ? 
27 


210 


Q.  Then  it  was  not  always  so  ? 
A.  That  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  Why  did  you  say,  then,  that  you  believe  it  is  at  the 
present  time  ? 

A.  Well,  I  get  mine. 

Q.  Well,  was  it  always  customary  for  Special  Ofl5cers  to  be 
paid  for  clothing  ? 

A.  I  never  had  a  Special  Officer  while  Lieutenant — only  a 
patrolman  taken  olF  the  street,  and  put  on  in  that  way. 

Q.  You  never  had  a  Special  Officer  charge  in  your  district  ? 

A.  There  was  one  appointed  in  the  Court  on  my  roll. 

Q.  What  to  do  in  Court? 

A.  He  takes  charge  of  the  cases  brought  in  by  the  police. 

Q.  Is  he  always  in  Court  ?    Does  he  wear  a  uniform  ? 

A.  A  blue  uniform,  the  same  as  this,  (indicating  his  cloth- 

Q.  You  mean  a  police  uniform  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  him  his  clothing  warrant  ? 
A.  He  was  paid  at  the  Central. 

Q.  He  was  detailed  from  your  district  ? 
A.  He  was  on  my  roll. 

Q.  You  certified  to  his  warrant  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  he  was  just  carried  on  my  roll  and  he  was  paid 
at  the  Central. 

Q.  You  certified  to  his  pay  ? 
A.  I  did  not  keep  his  time. 

Q.  Then  you  certified  to  his  time  ? 

A.  Not  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge.  It  is  two  years  and 
over,  and  I  may  have  forgotten. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  remember,  there  was  only  that  Special 
Officer  charged  on  your  pay  roll  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


211 


Q,  You  certified,  when*  you  were  a  Lieutenant,  to  the  time 
made  by  all  your  men  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  certified  their  clothing  warrants  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  certified  to  this  ofiice  for  the — to  the  clothing 
warrant,  presumably  ? 
A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  You  cannot  remember  exactly  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  you  have  no  coal  to  put  in,  what  do  you  do  then  ? 
A.  I  report  to  the  Lieutenant,  and  if  he  has  anything  for 
me  to  do  I  did  it. 

Q.  And  if  he  has  not  ? 
A.  I  do  nothing  ? 

Q.  How  much  of  your  time  is  engaged  in  doing  that  ? 

A.  I  generally  have  something  to  do  every  day — some  little 
thing  or  other. 

Q.  Around  your  station  house,  or  somewhere  else  ? 

A.  Around  the  station  house.  I  have  no  business  of  any  , 
kind  but  that. 


Joseph  Isaacs  Harvey,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law, 
testified  as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mrs.  Etta  Hyman  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  The  store  is  520  South  street. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  store  is  it  ? 

A.  A  pawnbroker  shop. 

Q.  You  say  you  know  Mrs.  Etta  Hyman  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  her  payment  of  a  license 
in  January  of  this  year  ? 


212 


A.  No,  sir.  She  asked  me  if  I  would  go  on  her  bond.  I 
told  her  that  I  was  very  busy,  but  as  I  was  going  in  that 
direction  that  I  would  go  there,  and  I  went  over  and  signed 
the  bond.  I  told  Major  Linton  that  I  was  busy  and  he  let  me 
sign  the  bond,  and  I  went  away  while  she  was  sitting  there. 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  see  her  pay  the  money  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  whether  she  paid  it  or  not? 
A.  No,  sir. 


William  L.  Bung  an,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman)  : 
Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 
A.  In  Frankford. 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  the  lieutenant  of  the  15th  police  district. 

Q.  These  two  men  who  have  testified  have  served  in  your 
district  ? 

A.  Wm.  B.  Baldwin  has. 

Q.  Has  Joseph  R.  Ash  served  in  that  district  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 
By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Who  makes  up  the  rolls  of  that  district  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  Who  placed  the  name  of  Joseph  R.  Ash  on  the  pay 
roll? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  By  whose  instructions  ? 

A.  By  Captain  Quirk's,  commanding  the  Third  Division. 
Q.  Do  you  not  make  oath  to  the  correctness  of  the  pay 
rolls  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  through  Captain  Quirk, — that  is,  for  Joseph 
Ash. 


213 


Q.  How  can  you  swear  to  it,  when  he  is  not  under  jour 
supervision  or  control  ? 

A.  I  go  to  Capt.  Quirk  at  the  end  of  the  month,  and  ask 
him  how  much  time  the  man  has  made. 

Q.  Then  you  swear  to  it  on  information  ? 

A.  I  have  not  sworn  to  any  pay-roll.  Mr.  Ash  was  ap- 
pointed a  patrolman  in  my  district,  the  same  as  any  other  man, 
and  was  assigned  to  a  number — No.  681. 

Q.  As  to  his  time,  you  say  that  you  received  it  from  the 
Captain  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Mr.  Baldwin's  time  you  make  up  yourself? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    He  reports  to  me  every  day. 
Q.  Every  morning  at  the  station  house  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  he  report  to  you  in  the  evening,  also  ? 

A.  Well,  not  as  a  general  thing  If  I  have  any  particular 
business  for  him  to  do,  he  is  there. 

Q.  As  a  rule,  does  he  attend  morning  roll  call  ? 

A.  Not  the  roll  call,  but  he  is  there.  If  I  have  any  place 
to  send  him  to,  he  goes  there,  or  any  business  for  him  to  tran- 
sact, I  send  him  to  do  it. 


Albert  C.  Allison^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 
A.  In  Manayunk. 

Q.  You  are  the  lieutenant  of  that  district  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  district  is  it  ? 

A.  The  18th. 

Q.  Do  you  know  John  F.  Smith  ? 
A.  I  do. 


214 


Q.  Is  he  in  the  service  of  the  police  department  ? 
A.  He  was,  up  to  the  first  of  the  month. 
Q.  How  long  had  he  been  ? 

A.  He  was  assigned  to  mj  district  as  a  regular  officer ;  I 
think  either  on  the  6th  or  7th  of  last  April,  and  then  he  was 
detailed  for  special  service. 

Q.  Where  did  he  live  in  that  time  ? 

A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  What  service  did  he  perform  ? 

A.  He  was  detailed  to  superintend  the  alterations  of  the 
twenty-fifth  district  house  on  Moyamensing  avenue  below 
Dickinson  street — a  new  district. 

Q.  And  he  was  on  the  payroll  of  your  district  in  Mana- 
yunk  ? 

A.  He  was  detailed  for  that  especial  service,  and  I  carried 
him  on  that  roll. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  What  did  you  say  he  was  doing  ? 

A.  Superintending  the  alterations  of  the  twenty-fifth  dis- 
trict house — a  new  district  down  there. 

Q.  That  is  the  old  Shiffler  hose  house  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that. 

Q.  When  did  he  first  appear  on  your  roll  ? 

A.  I  think  either  on  the  6th  or  7th  of  April.  I  don't  know 
the  exact  date. 

Q.  Who  certifies  to  his  time  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  On  what  information  ? 

A.  On  information  from  headquarters  that  he  is  making  full 
time.    All  special  officers  make  full  time. 
Q.  That  is  the  custom  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — ever  since  I  have  been  in  the  department,  and 
I  have  been  in  it  for  ten  years. 

Q.  He  was  put  on  your  roll  because  you  had  a  vacancy  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


215 


Q.  You  have  no  control  over  him  ?  He  does  not  report  to 
jou? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  don't  know  anything  about  his  qualifications  for  the 
work  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  JOU  ever  see  him  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  many  special  officers  have  you  on  your  roll  ? 
A.  I  have  one  now. 
Q.  Who? 

A.  A  man  detailed  from  the  ranks  to  do  special  duty  in  my 
district. 

Q.  How  long  has  it  been  since  you  had  more  than  one  ? 
A.    From  about  the  6th  or  7th  of  April  to  the  first  of  this 
month. 

Q.  How  many  had  you  then  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  How  many  had  you  previous  to  that  ? 
A.  One. 

Q.  You  generally  carry  one  or  two  ? 

A.  Yes,  a  patrolman  detailed  out  of  the  ranks  to  do  special 
service  in  my  district. 
Q.  In  citizen's  clothes  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  when  a  man  is  detailed  for  special  service  like 
patrolman  Smith  ;  does  he  receive  his  clothing  warrant  ?  Is 
that  the  custom  of  the  department  ? 

A.  That  is  the  custom  of  the  department  for  all  special 
officers  to  receive  clothing  warrants. 

Q.  It  is  the  custom  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Regardless  of  whether  they  dress  in  uniform,  or  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  know  that  my  special  officer  was 
measured  for  a  uniform,  but  a  different  uniform  from  what  the 
police  have. 


216 


Q.  I  suggest  Smith.    He  wouldn't  appear  in  patrolman's 
uniform  to  superintend  the  erection  of  that  house  ? 
A.  I  should  think  not. 
Q.  Did  he  receive  his  clothing  warrant  ? 
A.  I  suppose  he  received  a  portion  of  it. 
Q.  I  mean  a  portion. 

A.  The  6  months'  clothing  warrant  handed  on  July  31st, 
and  from  April  6th  or  7th  to  July  31st,  he  was  entitled  to  the 
amount  of  the  clothing  warrant. 

Q.  You  issue  the  clothing  warrant  semi-annually  ? 

A.  Twice  a  year. 

Q.  In  April  and  October  ? 

A.  In  July  31st  and  the  last  of  December. 

Q.  Was  Smith  on  the  roll  in  July  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  from  the  6th  or  7th  of  April  to  the  1st  of  this 
month.    Then  he  resigned. 

Q.  Then  he  received  his  clothing  warrant  in  July? 
A.  I  presume  so. 

Q.  Don't  you  have  to  certify  that  he  is  entitled  to  it  ? 
A.  I  certify  to  the  pay  roll — to  every  man  on  it. 
Q.  His  clothing  warrant  was  in  his  pay? 
A.  The  clothing  warrant  is  in  along  with  the  monthly 
salary  warrant. 

Q.  Is  it  a  separate  warrant  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  It  goes  in  with  the  other  warrants  ? 
A.  We  used  to  get  them  separately. 
'  Q.  It  is  $20  ? 
A.  $20  for  every  six  months — $40  a  year. 
Q.  So  in  July  Smith  received  the  additional  $20  on  his 
month's  pay? 

A.  No ;  he  was  entitled  from  the  6th  or  7th  of  April  up  to 
that  time. 

Q.  That  is  his  proportion  of  the  six  months  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


217 


By  Mr.  Roberts,  (Chairman.) 

Q.  Have  you  as  many  officers  as  you  need  in  Manayunkto 
cover  the  ground  properly  ? 
A.  Certainly  not. 

Q*  We  sometimes  hear  that  there  are  not  enough  officers, 
and  I  wanted  to  know. 

A.  I  could  place  fifty  officers  there  readily. 

Q.  Then,  when  a  man  is  put  on  your  pay  roll,  and  detailed 
to  work  in  the  southern  part  of  the  city,  you  are  just  that 
much  worse  off  than  Councils  mean  you  to  be  ? 

A.  I  am  one  man  short. 

Q.  You  have  work  for  this  man  in  your  district  if  you  could 
have  had  him  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Sometime  ago,  I  presume,  the  Mayor  it  was,  issued  an 
order  asking  every  member  of  the  force  to  provide  himself 
with  a  new  revolver,  and  the  department  furnished  the  revol- 
vers.   Were  the  men  required  to  pay  for  them  ? 

A.  The  men  did  pay  for  them. 

Q.  Did  you  collect  the  money? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  much  from  each  patrolman  ? 
A.  $8.04. 

Q.  And  paid  it  over  to  the  Chief? 

A.  No ;  I  did  not  pay  directly  to  the  Chief ;  I  paid  it  at 
headquarters. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  pay  it  to  ? 

A.  I  think  I  paid  it  to  the  Captain  in  my  division — the 
Fourth  Division.    The  officers  have  always  been  buying  their- 
pistols.    They  never  were  furnished  by  the  city. 
28 


218 


William  L.  Dungan^  re-called. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  How  many  special  officers  have  you  on  your  roll  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  Baldwin  is  one,  and  who  is  the  other  ? 
A.  Ash. 

Q.  Are  you  accustomed  to  carrying  two  or  more  ? 

A.  Accustomed  to  carrying  two. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  Lieutenant  ? 

A.  Since  August  '84. 

Q.  Since  that  time  have  you  carried  more  than  two? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  carried  two  all  the  time? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  have  carried  one  ? 

A.  I  carried  one  until  Ash  was  appointed. 

Q.  Only  Mr.  Baldwin  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  special  officer  ? 
A.  I  have  one  patrolman  detailed,  acting  as  a  special  officer, 
wearing  citizens  clothing. 
Q.  In  the  district  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  mean  detailed  out  of  the  district  ?  You  have  only  two 
detailed  out  of  the  district — Ash  aud  Baldwin  ? 

A.  There  are  three  men  besides  those  detailed  out  of  the 
district. 

Q.  What  are  their  names  ? 

A.  Harry  Stanwood,  who  is  detailed  in  Court — who  has 
charge  of  the  police  cases  in  court ;  and  John  Wear,  who  is 
detailed  to  Chief  Kelly. 

Q.  Who  is  the  third  one  ? 

A.  Alfred  Bye. 


219 


Q.  What  does  he  do  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Where  does  he  go  to  ? 

A.  He  reports  to  Chief  Kelly. 

Q.  That  makes  two  out  of  your  district  who  go  to  Chief 
Kelly  for  orders  ?    Mr.  Wear  and  Mr.  Bye — is  that  correct  ? 
A,  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  makes  you  five  special  officers,  none  of  them  doing 
duty  in  your  district  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  men  have  you  on  your  roll  ? 
A.  Forty-four. 

Q.  And  five  of  them  don't  do  duty  in  the  district. 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  have  these  two  men  been  with  Chief  Kelly  ? 
A.  Alfred  Bye  was  appointed  on  October  14,  1884,  and 
John  Wear  January  1,  1885. 

Q.  They  all  make  full  time  of  course  ?  They  tell  me  that 
is  the  custom  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  they  ever  report  to  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  does  this  man  do  at  court? 

A.  He  has  charge  of  all  the  police  cases. 

Q.  Does  he  belong  to  the  Court — under  the  control  of  the 
Court  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  that  question. 

Q.  You  don't  know  what  he  does,  only  that  he  has  charge 
of  the  police  cases  ? 

A.  Of  the  police  cases  in  the  Court. 

Q.  You  don't  know  what  his  duties  are  at  all  at  the  Court  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


220 


Q.  Who  gives  you  a  return  of  the  time  made  by  Mr.  Wear 
and  Mr.  Bye  ? 
A.  Chief  Kelly. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  What  are  the  limits  of  your  police  district  ? 
A.  22  square  miles. 

By  Mr.  Roberts : 

Q.  It  comprises  the  Twenty-third  ward  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  44  men  enough  to  cover  that  District  ? 
A.  Well,  it  is  a  good  bit  not  policed  at  all,  and  never  has 
been. 

Q.  Are  there  enough  men  to  do  police  duty  there  to  pro- 
tect the  city  in  that  portion  where  you  have  work  to  do  ? 
A.  We  have  been  getting  along  very  nicely  ;  yes,  sir. 
Q.  You  have  enough  men  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Edwin  L.  Usilton,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testi- 
fies as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  Lieutenant  of  the  Fifth  District. 
Q.  Do  you  know  Warren  King  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Has  such  a  man  ever  been  on  the  pay  roll  in  your  dis- 
trict ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  has  he  been  ? 
A.  He  went  on  July  7,  '84. 


221 


Q.  When  did  he  go  off? 
A.  September  31,  '85. 
Q.  You  don't  know  him  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  him  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  such  a  man  ? 

A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  What  makes  you  think  so  ? 

A.  Well,  the  Chief  told  me  he  was  a  good  man,  and  ought 
to  be  put  on  secret  service  under  Chief  Kelly. 

Q.  That  is  the  sort  of  service  he  is  doing  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  not  wanted  to  be  known  by  the  public 
generally. 

Q.  Don't  you  certify  once  a  month  about  the  work  done  by 
him  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  A.  K.  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  has  he  been  on  the  rolls  in  your  Department? 
A.  He  went  on  January  1,  1886. 
Q.  Is  he  still  on  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  sort  of  work  does  he  do  ? 

A.  He  is  on  special  duty  under  the  charge  of  Chief  Kelly. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  When  did  you  say  Warren  King  went  on  duty  ? 
A.  July  7,  1884. 

Q.  When  did  he  cease  acting  ? 
A.  December  31,  1885. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  special  officers  in  your  district 
besides  King  and  Gray  ? 
A.  Two  others. 


222 


Q.  Where  do  they  do  duty? 

A.  At  my  station — Adam  Crumley  and  Potts,  a  colored 
officer. 

Q.  So  you  have  four  special  officers  ? 
A.  No.    King  is  off  now. 

Q.  Two  of  them  do  regular  duty  in  the  district,  and  one  i& 
under  Chief  Kelly  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  or  Chief  Stewart. 

Q.  How  many  officers  have  you  in  the  district  ? 

A.  Thirty-nine. 

Q.  What  are  the  limits  of  your  district  ? 

A.  It  is  the  Eighth  Ward. 

Q.  It  is  very  thickly  built  up  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Almost  entirely  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  have  enough  officers  there  for  the  purposes  of  the 
district  ? 

A.  Well,  J  don't  think  there  enough  officers  in  the  city ; 
we  ought  to  have  as  many  again.  Still,  we  have  done  very 
well.    Of  course  we  need  men  for  special  duty. 

Q.  Every  officer  who  is  detailed  for  a  special  duty,  who  is 
on  your  rolls — curtails  your  ability,  in  a  police  sense,  to  pro- 
tect your  district  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Sometimes  special  officers  are  of  more  use 
than  those  in  uniform.  I  don't  know  but  what  those  officers 
are  doing  work  in  the  district. 

Q.  You  have  thirty-nine  officers  who  do  duty  in  the  Eighth 
Ward,  and  two  are  in  citizens  garb.  Gray  is  on  your  roll, 
and  doing  duty  at  the  Central  Station  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  had  a  patrolman  doing  duty  in  Gray's  place  you 
would  have  a  place  for  him  ? 

A.  He  may  be  doing  duty  in  my  district,  down  there ;  I 
don't  know.    I  had  once  to  send  a  colored  man  away  up  town 


223 


to  do  duty.  It  was  because  we  did  not  want  him  to  be  known. 
It  was  in  regard  to  the  policy  racket.  Gray  and  other  special 
officers  may  be  doing  duty  in  my  district. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  Warren  King  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  the  man  represented  to  be  Warren 
King? 

A.  I  never  asked  to  see  him. 

Q.  How  many  men  of  that  kind  are  there  in  the  depart- 
partmen  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  the  question. 

Q.  All  you  know  is  the  one  out  of  your  district  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  man  named  Buck,  within  the  last  year 
or  eighteen  months  on  your  roll,  who  performed  special  service  ? 
Do  you  remember  any  such  name  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  Beck? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  would  remember  if  there  had  been  any  suck  a  man  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 

A.  Buck  or  Beck  ? 

A.  I  think  so.  I  have  had  a  great  many  changes  in  my 
district,  and  I  would  have  to  look  over  the  books  to  tell  some 
of  the  names. 

Q.  Does  Officer  Gray  ever  report  to  you  ? 
A.  I  have  seen  him  frequently. 

Q.  What  is  his  name  ? 

A.  I  always  thought  he  had  a  middle  name.  Now  they  say 
it  is  plain  Alexander  Gray. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  known  him  ? 
A.  Some  time. 


224 

Q.  How  long  has  he  been  in  the  service  ? 
A.  Fifteen  or  sixteen  years. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  ? 

A.  He  was  a  patrolman  for  some  years. 

Q.  And  then  what  ? 

A.  Then  detectire  awhile  down  here. 

Q.  He  is  the  man  commonly  known  as  Alec.  Gray  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  is  on  your  roll  as  A.  K.  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  get  his  time  from  Chief  Kelley  ? 
A.  Well,  if  he  loses  any  time  they  would  report  it  to  me 
and  I  would  dock  him. 

Q.  King  is  not  on  now  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  He  was  dropped  off  by  orders  from  the  Central  ? 

A.  The  Chief. 

Q.  When  was  he  dropped  ? 

A.  December  31,  1885. 

Q.  Then  Gray  came  on  immediately  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  that  King  was  dropped  and  Gray  came  on  right 
away  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  Department  could  not  stand  without  their  places 
being  filled,  I  suppose  ?    How  many  subs  have  you  ? 

A.  We  have  three  subs,  but  we  have  several  vacancies  to 
fill  yet ;  we  get  outside  subs  to  work  in  their  places. 

Q.  Subs  only  take  the  places  of  men  who  are  off  sick  or 
absent  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


225 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  man,  who  drew  the  warrants,  by  the 
name  of  Warren  King  ? 

A.  It  was  taken  out  at  the  Central. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  man  who  drew  the  warrants  for  War- 
ren King  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  are  positive  about  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  All  your  warrants  for  your  thirty -nine  men  came  to  you? 
A.  Mr.  King's  did  not. 

Q.  It  was  taken  out  down  at  the  Central  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Who  got  the  warrant  at  the  Central  ? 
A.  I  cannot  tell  you.    I  don't  know. 

Q.  Didn't  you  carry  a  man  by  the  name  of  Burns  on  your 
roll? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  carry  him  ? 

A.  From  May  12,  1884,  to  October  18,  1884. 

Q.  Did  he  report  to  you  ? 

A.  He  was  there  doing  duty  as  a  clerk  for  the  physician — 
Dr.  French.  He  had  a  great  many  men  to  examine  when  he 
first  went  in.    Of  course  they  were  in  my  house  every  day. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley: 

Q.  That  is  why  he  came  to  be  on  your  roll,  because  the 
examinations  were  made  in  your  house  ? 

A.  I  suppose  so. 

Q.  He  was  detailed  for  that  special  duty? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
29 


226 


Q.  He  kept  the  records  and  wrote  out  descriptions  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    When  they  got  through  the  biggest  portion 
of  that  he  resigned. 

Q.  He  was  only  on  for  the  time  being,  while  the  examina- 
tions were  going  on  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


Francis  R.  Kelly^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fies as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Chief  of  detectives  of  the  city. 

Q.  Do  you  know  William  Lang  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    I  know  a  man  by  that  name. 

Q.  Is  that  his  proper  name  ? 

A.  It  is  not. 

Q.  Why  do  you  call  him  William  Lang  ? 
A.  Because  his  name  is  on  the  rolls  in  that  way,  for  the 
purpose  of  procuring  his  warrants  for  him  monthly. 

Q.  Does  he  do  any  work  for  that  pay  ? 
A.  He  did — valuable  work — secret  service. 

Q.  Would  it  be  improper  to  have  that  work  known  ? 

A.  It  would  disclose  the  work  that  he  has  performed,  and 
it  would  be  against  the  best  interests  of  the  public  service  and 
my  department. 

Q.  Then  this  man  did  valuable  work  under  that  name  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    But  he  is  not  on  the  rolls  of  the  department 
now. 

Q.  How  long  was  he  on  the  rolls  ? 

A.  He  made  seven  days  in  February,  1885,  and  continued 
up  to  the  25th  day  of  May,  last. 


227 


By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  How  many  officers  in  the  department  have  you  doing 
special  duty  under  you  ? 
A.  At  the  present  time  ? 

Q.  Yes. 

A.  Not  any. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  had  from  time  to  time  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  Did  you  know  a  man  who  passed  under  the  name  of 
Warren  King  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  deliver  his  warrants  to  him  ? 

A.  I  delivered  the  money.  That  was  done  for  the  purpose 
of  not  having  him  to  go  where  he  would  be  likely  to  be  seen, 
getting  his  warrant  cashed. 

Q.  You.  did  that  same  thing  with  the  man  who  passed  under 
the  name  of  William  Lang  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  This  was  done  for  the  purpose  of  concealing  their 
identity  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  They  were  doing  secret  duty  altogether  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir.  They  gave  me  secret  information  which  was 
of  benefit  in  my  department.  And  it  must  be  plain  to  all  by 
the  work  which  has  been  accomplished  in  the  city  in  that  way. 

Q.  You  say  you  have  no  special  officers  under  you  now  ? 
A.  No. 

Q.  Up  to  what  period  of  time  have  these  special  officers 
been  under  you  ? 

A.  On  the  twenty-fifth  of  May  last,  Lang  was  dropped, 
and  in  December  King  was  dropped. 

Q.  You  have  no  men  doing  this  kind  of  duty  since  Lang 
and  King  severed  their  connection  with  the  Department  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


228 


Q.  Do  you  know  Alexander  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  he  report  to  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  That  was  a  mistake  of  the  Lieutenant. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  Department  does  he  report  to  ? 

A.  I  believe  he  is  under  Chief  Stewart,  but  I  am  not  posi- 
tive about  that.  I  have  seen  him  up  and  down  in  the  Chief's 
Office. 

Q.  You  know  nothing  about  the  character  of  the  service  he 
is  doing  in  the  Department  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley. 

Q.  How  many  men  have  you  in  your  office  ? 
A.  Seven  detectives. 

Q.  Seven  recognized  detectives,  provided  by  ordinance  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  myself  as  Chief  of  the  Department.  I 
have  some  men  detailed  as  special  officers. 
Q.  How  many  of  them  ? 

A.  Officer  Stanwood,  who  is  the  court  officer  ;  he  keeps  the 
court  records  of  the  trial, of  criminals. 
Q.  What  district  is  he  from  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  he  is  on  the  rolls  of  the  15th — a  Frank- 
ford  District.  Then  there  is  Officer  John  Wear,  who  is  there 
at  night  in  charge  of  the  Central  Station,  to  take  complaints, 
and  answer  telegrams  and  do  such  duty. 

Q.  He  is  in  the  office  to  receive  telegrams  and  such  things  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir ;  to  take  complaints  of  any  one  who  may  come 
to  make  complaints. 

Q.  What  is  Officer  Jones  there  for  ? 

A.  He  is  not  under  me.  He  has  a  position  after  12  o'clock 
in  the  Mayor's  Office ;  he  is  not  in  the  detective  department. 

Q.  Officer  Wear  is  in  your  department ;  and  you  consider 
it  necessary  to  have  such  a  man  there  ? 

A.  Quite  necessary. 


229 


Q.  You  do  not  want  to  detail  one  of  your  seven  experts. 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  more  have  you  besides  Stanwood  and  Wear? 
A.  Officer  James  Tate,  a  special  officer.    I  believe  he  is  on 
the  rolls  of  the  Fourth  District. 

Q.  What  does  he  do  ? 

A.  He  has  special  duty  to  perform,  a  duty  the  same  as  a 
detective  officer. 

Q.  What  others  have  you  ? 

A.  There  is  James  Linton.  His  duty  is  to  make  daily 
records  of  the  reports  of  the  special  officers  of  the  entire  city. 
The  returns  are  submitted  to  me  in  writing  by  the  special 
officers  of  the  different  districts. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  simply  file  those  away  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  they  are  copied  into  a  large  book,  which  is 
used  for  reference  and  information  in  the  department. 

Q.  Then  he  acts  as  clerk  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  other  special  officers  have  you  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  is  all. 

Q.  What  other  employees  have  you,  then  ? 
A.  No  other,  except  the  seven  detectives  and  myself,  and 
the  special  officers  named. 

Q.  Do  you  know  an  officer  named  Bye  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  omitted  to  state  that  he  is  a  special  officer, 
detailed  as  a  horse  detective.  Following  up  information  about 
stolen  horses. 

Q.  That  is  another  detective  ? 
A.  A  special  officer. 

Q.  When  Councils  make  an  appropriation  for  a  Chief  and 
seven  detectives,  what  right  have  you  to  put  on  other  detectives  ? 

A.  On  account  of  the  force  being  small  and  the  necessity 
of  an  increase  in  the  force. 


230 


Q.  Who  do  you  think  ought  to  be  the  judge  of  that  ? 
A.  Well,  myself.    I  suggest  to  the  Mayor  and  the  Chief. 

Q.  The  Councils  might  just  as  well  make  an  appropriatian 
for  three  or  four,  or  none  ? 

A.  It  would  be  better  if  they  would  make  an  appropriation 
for  about  ten. 

Q.  You  think  that  your  judgment  is  superior  to  the  judg- 
ment of  Councils  ? 

A.  No.  But  I  am  in  the  position  to  be  the  best  judge  of 
the  number  of  men  it  takes  to  perform  the  duties. 

Q.  So  it  does  not  make  any  difference  to  you  how  many 
Councils  say  you  shall  have  ? 

A.  Well,  Councils  said  that  we  should  have  that  many  a 
number  of  years  ago,  and  since  then  the  city  has  increased, 
and  the  criminal  classes  have  increased. 

Q.  But  Councils  have  refused  to  increase  the  number  ? 
A.  I  think  that  was  bad  judgment. 

Q.  According  to  your  judgment  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  does  not  make  any  difference  to  you  what  Councils 
do,  as  you  put  them  on  as  you  pleose  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Only  three  or  four.  I  told  you  that  they  per- 
form a  good  service,  and  their  services  are  certainly  required. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  have  the  right  to  increase  your  force 
fifty  per  cent. 

A.  Well,  some  men  have  distinguished  themselves,  and 
have  asked  that  they  be  transferred  to  the  Central  Station,  as 
men  capable  of  doing  detective  duty. 

Q.  Was  the  Mayor  aware  that  you  increased  your  force  of 
detectives  ? 

A.  He  knows  that  I  have  special  officers  assigned  there. 

Q.  Acting  as  detectives  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


231 


Q.  And  he  permits  the  Ordinance  of  Councils  to  be  thus 
cle'Brly  violated  ? 

A.  He  followed  custom.  Mayor  Stokley  had  six  special 
officers,  besides  eight  detectives. 

Q.  Some  people  thought  that  all  of  the  detectives  had  best 
be  abolished. 

A.  The  public  will  be  the  best  judge  of  the  services  they 
have  rendered  under  the  present  administration,  when  the 
condition  of  the  City  is  taken  into  consideration,  and  the 
number  of  criminal  classes — and  what  has  been  accomplished. 
No  city  in  this  country  is  so  free  from  the  depredations  of  the 
criminal  classes  as  Philadelphia. 

Q.  So  that  if  Councils  should  refuse  to  increase  your  force 
you  would  still  add  to  it  according  to  your  judgment,  and 
carry  it  on  with  as  many  men  as  you  thought  necessary  to  do 
the  work. 

A.  No,  sir.    I  am  subject  to  my  superior  officers. 

Q.  You  are  acting  directly  under  the  directions  of  the 
Chief  of  Police  and  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  The  Chief  of  Police,  I  take  my  orders  from,  and  he 
confers  with  the  Mayor.  My  orders  come  from  the  Chief  of 
Police. 

Q.  Then  it  was  he  who  told  you  to  increase  your  force  of 
detectives  ? 

A.  I  suggested  it. 

Q.  It  was  on  your  recommendation  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  You  know  that  robberies  are  still  going  on  in  the  city  ? 

A.  There  are  a  number.  We  cannot  suppress  all  of  them 
entirely,  there  are  a  few  and  the  public  generally  know  about 
them. 


232 


Q.  That  shows  that  the  system  which  you  have  put  in 
vogue  does  not  have  the  effect  of  entirely  ridding  the  city  of 
these  people. 

A.  Not  entirely.  That  would  be  impossible,  but  it  is  about 
as  close  as  you  can  come  to  it.  Of  course,  people  are  coming 
back  into  the  city,  and  some  of  them  are  finding  their  houses 
have  been  robbed.  All  such  cases  have  not  been  reported  to 
us  yet.  But  the  officers  do  the  best  they  can.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  entirely  stop  it. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  If  I  understand  you  rightly  in  regard  to  Warren  King 
and  Lang,  there  is  a  class  of  detective  work  to  be  performed, 
and  the  persons  who  perform  it  should  not  be  known  by  any 
person  except  yourself  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  It  is  quite  necessary  to  perform  such  duty. 

Q.  In  such  a  case,  you  take  a  person  or  persons  and  giva 
them  an  assumed  name  on  the  pay  roll,  so  that  it  shall  not  be 
possible  for  them  to  be  known  as  being  connected  with  your 
department  ? 

A.  That  is  the  idea.    It  is  to  cover  up  their  identity. 

Q.  It  is  to  prevent  their  identification,  that  you  draw  the 
warrants  of  those  persons  and  receipt  for  them,  and  draw  the 
money  and  pay  them  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  it  simply  for  their  protection,  and  to  enable  them 
to  properly  fulfill  the  duties  you  assign  them  to  perform  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  the  way  you  account  for  the  names  of  William 
Lang  and  Warren  King  on  the  pay  rolls,  without  anybody  ap- 
pearing here  to  testify  that  they  are  the  identical  persons 
named  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

At  this  point,  upon  motion  of  Mr.  Clay,  the  Committee 
took  a  recess  for  an  hour. 


233 


After  Recess. 

The  Meeting  reassembled  at  2.30  o'clock  P.  M.,  upon  the 
termination  of  the  hour  fixed  for  the  recess. 

Mr.  Clay  : — I  desire,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  state  that  one  of 
the  members  of  the  Committee  is  very  desirous  of  getting 
away  as  early  as  possible  this  afternoon.  Consequently  I  will 
now  move  that  the  Committee  adjourn  twenty  minutes  past 
three  o'clock,  until  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay. 

It  was  agreed  to. 


Edward  M.  Lyons^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fies as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Lieutenant  of  police. 

Q.  Of  which  District  ? 

A.  Of  the  Twenty-third  District. 

Q.  Do  you  know  William  Lang  ? 

A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Was  he  ever  on  the  rolls  in  your  district  ? 
A.  He  was. 
Q.  When? 

A.  I  cannot  give  you  the  date.  He  was  on  over  a  year — 
somewhere  in  that  neighborhood.  I  received  orders  from 
headquarters  that  William  Lang  had  been  appointed  in  my 
district  for  special  or  secret  service  at  the  Central  Station. 

Q.  You  never  knew  him  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 
30 


234 


By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  How  many  special  officers  have  you  in  your  district  ? 
A.  I  have  three  with  Lang. 

Q.  What  are  the  names  of  the  others  ? 
A.  James  Colburn  and  John  Carpenter. 
Q.  Where  do  they  do  duty  ? 

A.  In  the  district  and  sometimes  out  of  the  district.  Some- 
times in  and  sometimes  out  of  the  district. 
Q.  Have  you  any  other  special  officers  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Those  are  the  only  three  yon  have  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    I  think  I  never  had  more  than  three  specials. 


Alexander  Crray^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testifies 
as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  No.  181 0  Camac  street. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  A  police  officer. 

Q.  You  are  on  the  police  force  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  ? 

A.  Since  the  1st  of  January,  1886. 

Q.  In  what  district  ? 

A.  The  Fifth  District. 

Q.  What  is  the  character  of  the  service  you  perform  t 

A.  Special  duty. 

Q.  In  that  district  ? 

A.  In  that  district  and  other  districts. 


235 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  What  other  districts  ? 

A.  All  the  districts — the  city  at  large. 

Q.  Who  details  you  ? 

A.  The  Chief  of  Police. 

Q.  Mr.  Stewart? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  on  duty  now  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  have  you  been  doing  this  morning  ? 

A.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Q.  Why  do  you  decline  to  answer  ? 

A.  Because  it  might  injure  what  I  am  doing. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  yesterday  ? 

A.  I  was  absent  from  the  city  yesterday. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  ?    You  said  you  were  on  duty  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  so. 

Q.  Then  you  were  not  on  duty  yesterday  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  not  actual  duty. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  the  day  before  ? 

A.  I  was  absent  from  the  city. 

Q.  With  leave  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  leave  of  Chief  Stewart  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  were  you  ? 

A.  I  was  down  in  Maryland. 

Q.  Where  were  you  last  week  ? 

A.  In  Philadelphia. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  ? 

A.  I  was  moving  part  of  the  time. 

Q.  Your  household  goods  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


236 


Q.  What  else  were  you  doing  ? 

A.  What  do  you  mean  ?    That  is  a  pretty  broad  question. 

Q.  What  kind  of  duty  were  you  on  ? 

A.  Special  duty. 

Q.  What  kind  of  special  duty  ? 

A.  For  the  Police  Department. 

Q.  What  kind  of  special  duty  were  you  on  ? 

A.  Engaged  on  cases  connected  with  the  Police  Department. 

Q.  Yes,  I  presume  that.    Now,  what  were  you  doing  ? 
A.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Q.  You  decline  to  answer  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  a  special  officer?  , 
A.  Ever  since  the  1st  of  January,  1886. 

Q.  Have  you  been  on  special  service  all  the  time  since  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  us  anything  you  have  done  since  the  1st 
•of  January,  1886  ? 

A.  No,  sir,    I  decline  positively  to  answer. 

Q.  You  will  not  tell  us  anything  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  city  were  you  on  duty  in  at  any  time 
since  the  1st  of  January,  1886  ? 

A.  In  different  parts  of  the  city.    I  will  not  specify. 

Q.  You  decline  to  answer  even  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  city  all  the  time  since  January  1st? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  of  the  time? 
A.  A  great  deal  of  the  time. 

Q.  About  how  much  ? 

A.  Part  of  the  time  I  was  in  New  York. 


237 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  you  where  you  were  ? 
A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 
Q.  About? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you.  I  did  not  keep  any  account  of  it.  I 
did  not  have  any  idea  that  this  question  was  to  be  asked  me. 

Q.  It  was  not  necessary  for  you  to  know  that  in  advance  in 
order  to  tell  us  what  we  want  to  know.  You  ought  to  know. 
Now,  you  have  been  on  duty  eight  months  since  the  first  of 
January,  have  you? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  drawn  eight  months  pay  ? 

A.  Yes.  sir. 

Q.  Draw  full  pay  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  appeared  in  police  clothes  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  how  much  of  the  eight  months  have  you  been  in 
the  City  of  Philadelphia  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  how  much. 
Q.  Half  the  time  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  More  than  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  been  here  six  months  of  the  time  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  At  least  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Perhaps  seven  months  ? 
A.  I  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Well,  about  six  months  you  say  you  have  been  here  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  us  where  you  were  the  other  two  months  ? 
A.  At  different  places — at  Atlantic  City,  Pottstown,  and  in. 
New  York. 


238 

Q.  Were  you  there  on  official  business  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  sent  you  to  those  places  ? 
A.  The  Chief  of  Police. 

Q.  What  official  business  did  you  do  at  Atlantic  City  ? 
A.  I  decline  to  answer. 

Q.  You  won't  tell  this  Committee  what  you  were  doing  at 
Atlantic  City  ? 

A.  I  reported  to  the  Chief  of  Police  what  I  was  doing. 

Q.  But  you  decline  to  tell  the  Committee  what  you  were 
doing  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  in  any  business  there  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  a  detective  there  ? 

A.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question. 

Q.  Will  you  say  that  you  were  not  a  detective  there? 
A.  I  was  not  a  detective  there. 

Q.  Were  you  on  police  duty  connected  with  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  on  police  duty,  connected  with  this  city,  in 
New  York  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  in  New  York  ? 
A.  I  was  there  several  times ;  I  was  in  New  York  sometimes 
two  days  at  a  time,  sometimes  one  day. 

Q.  You  were  sent  over  there  by  Chief  Stewart? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  Pottstown  you  also  spent  some  time  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  there  on  official  business  ? 
.  A.  Yes,  sir. 


239 


Q.  How  long  were  you  there  ? 

A.  Four  days  at  one  time. 

Q.  Was  it  on  secret  police  duty  ? 

A.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question ;  It  was  on  police  duty. 
Q.  Was  it  on  public  police  duty  you  went  to  Pottstown  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  on  private  police  duty. 

A.  If  you  will  explain  that  question  a  little  different  I  may 
answer  you  maybe. 

Q.  A  few  minutes  ago  you  said  that  you  were  not  on  public 
police  duty  at  Pottstown,  or  do  you  say  that  you  were  there 
on  neither  public  or  private  police  duty  ? 

A.  I  said  I  was  not  on  public  police  duty. 

Q.  Were  you  there  on  private  police  duty  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  for  the  City  of  Philadelphia. 

Q.  When  you  were  at  Pottstown,  then,  you  went  on  private 
police  duty  for  this  city  ? 

A.  It  is  not  supposed  to  be  known  what  I  was  on  to  the 
people  there,  if  that  is  what  you  mean. 

Q.  I  am  only  asking  you  and  not  the  people  of  Potts- 
town. 

A.  I  will  try  to  answer  your  question. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  you  went  to  Pottstown  on  pri- 
vate police  duty  for  the  City  of  Philadelphia  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  were  there  four  days  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  presume  you  were  after  criminals  ? 
A.  I  decline  to  answer  what  I  was  after. 

Q.  For  two  months  since  the  first  of  January  you  have  been 
absent  from  the  city,  and  you  say  that  you  were  here  for  six 
months  and  have  drawn  eight  months  pay.  Who  directs  your 
movements  ? 

A.  The  Chief  of  Police,  Lieutenant  Usilton. 


240 


Q.  That  is,  of  the  Fifth  District? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  report  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When? 

A.  Frequently. 

Q.  When  did  you  report  there  last  ? 

A.  Last  week  was  the  last  time  I  was  there. 

Q.  What  day  of  last  week  was  it  ? 

A.  I  was  there  on  Thursday  and  Friday. 

Q.  Did  you  report  on  roll  call  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  time  in  the  day  was  it? 

A.  It  was  not  in  the  day  time,  but  the  night  time. 

Q.  Did  you  see  the  Lieutenant  there  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Each  time  that  you  were  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  knows  you  doesn't  he  ? 

A.  Very  well. 

Q.  Perfectly  well  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  he  should  say  that  you  had  never  reported  to  him, 
you  would  wonder  at  it  ? 

A.  I  certainly  should,  if  that  is  what  you  mean  by  report- 
ing. Him  and  I  were  together  in  the  station,  in  his  room. 

Q.  What  were  you  doing  prior  to  the  first  of  this  year  ? 

A.  I  was  connected  with  the  Police  Department  for  very 
near  fourteen  years. 

Q.  Right  up  to  the  end  of  last  year  ? 

A.  Up  to  the  6th  of  November. 

Q.  Of  last  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


241 


Q.  And  between  that  and  the  end  of  the  year,  you  were  not 
doing  anything  ? 
A.  Not  a  thing. 

Q.  What  position  did  you  occupy  in  the  Police  Department 
of  the  city  ?  You  say  you  were  on  the  force  about  fourteen 
years  ? 

A.  Very  near  fourteen  years. 
Q.  What  w^ere  you  doing  ? 

A.  different  things — patrolman,  special  officer  and  detective 
officer. 

Q.  Were  you  a  detective  officer  in  the  last  position? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  were  you  discharged  from  the  service  for  ? 
A.  I  decline  to  answer  that  question. 

Q.  What  were  you  discharged  for  ?  Was  there  anything 
disagreeable  about  it  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  it  is  a  matter  of  public  interest. 

Q.  Certainly  it  is,  because  you  are  a  public  officer.    Now  if 

there  is  anything  disagreeable  to  you  in  it  

A.  There  was  nothing  criminal  about  it. 

Q.  I  suppose  not.    Hence,  I  say  that  if  you  do  not  like  to 

answer  you  need  

A.  The  papers  were  full  of  it  at  the  time  I  was  discharged. 

Q.  That  is  the  reason  why  I  want  to  know  ? 

A.  I  was  discharged  for  an  alleged  neglect  of  duty. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  you  neglected  your  duty  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  I  di  not  think  so  myself. 

Q.  No  ;  of  course  not.    You  remained  for  duty  until  the 
first  of  the  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  the  Mayor  reinstated  you  as  a  patrolman  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
31 


242 

Q.  And  since  then  you  have  been  doing  private  detective 
work  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  is  it  you  are  not  under  the  chief  of  detectives  ? 
A.  There  are  many  special  officers  in  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia not  under  the  chief  of  detectives. 

Q.  They  are  not  all  under  him  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Are  there  any  other  private  official  like  you  who  receive 
orders  from  Chief  Stewart. 

A.  That  I  cannot  say.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.  It  was  rumored  in  the  city  that  you  were  engaged  in 
other  occupations  during  the  last  three  or  four  months.  Was 
there  any  truth  in  that  ? 

A.  I  did  not  have  any  other  occupation. 

Q.  Did  you  engage  in  the  service  of  any  other  person  or 
persons,  since  the  first  of  January. 
A.  Not  one. 

Q.  Did  you  do  work  of  any  kind,  or  perform  any  services 
for  anybody  in  New  Jersey,  or  in  Philadelphia,  except  for  the 
city  of  Philadelphia,  in  this  year. 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  But  still  you  decline  to  say  what  you  were  doing  at  At- 
lantic City. 

A.  I  certainly  do.  I  report  to  the  Chief  of  Police,  and  he 
would  be  the  proper  one  to  tell. 

Q.  Perhaps  he  might  explain.  He  kno|vs  what  you  were 
doing  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  he  would  explain. 

Q.  Did  he  know  what  you  were  doing  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Of  course,  then  he  was  satisfied  with  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


243 


Q.  You  were  merely  carrying  out  his  orders? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  at  Atlantic  City  at  one  time  ? 
A.  What  do  you  mean  by  that  ? 

Q.  I  mean  how  long  consecutively,  without  coming  back  to 
the  city  ;  were  you  there  a  month  at  one  time  ? 
A.  No,  sir 

Q.  Were  you  there  two  weeks  at  any  one  time  ?  . 

A.  No,  sir.    I  was  back  and  forward  all  the  time. 

Q.  What  was  the  greatest  number  of  days  or  weeks  you 
were  at  Atlantic  city  without  coming  back  to  this  city  ? 

A.  No  number  of  weeks.  I  was  up  here,  back  and  for- 
wards.   I  Avas  up  here  every  week. 

Q.  Where  you  there  every  week  ? 

A.  I  was  up  here  every  week. 

Q.  Did  you  live  at  Atlantic  city  ? 

A.  My  family  has  been  there  every  summer  for  ten  years. 

Q.  Perhaps  you  went  down  in  the  afternoon,  like  a  great 
many  others,  and  came  back  in  the  morning.  Did  you  stay 
there  as  long  as  a  w  eek  at  a  time  ? 

A.  Not  so  long  as  that. 

Q.  Is  your  family  down  there  now  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  they  are  living  at  1810  Camac  street. 

Q.  You  have  just  moved  in  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  on  last  Wednesday,  in  time  enough  to  get 
on  the  extra  assessment. 

At  this  point  the  committee  adjourns  to  meet  to-morrow 
morning,  September  8,  1886,  at  ten  o'clock. 


FOURTH  DAY. 


SELECT  COUNCIL  CHAMBER. 


Philadelphia,  September  8,  1886. 

The  Committee  re-assembled  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.,  this  day, 
in  the  Chamber  of  Select  Council,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present : — Mr.  Roberts  in  the  Chair ;  Mr.  Eckstein,  Clerk, 
and  the  following  members  of  the  Committee — Messrs.  Ed- 
wards, Bardsley,  Iseminger,  Claridge,  Clay,  Reinstine,  and 
Lawrence,  President  of  Common  Council ;  of  Counsel — Mr. 
Warwick,  the  City  Solicitor ;  Messrs  Earle,  Brightly,  Ruddi- 
man,  and  White,  as  representing  the  Mayor. 

AN  OMISSION. 

In  the  rush  in  getting  out  a  transcript  of  my  notes  of  yes- 
terday's testimony  the  following,  which  should  come  in  on  page 
197,  just  previous  to  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Stevenson,  was 
overlooked : 

SAMUEL  B.  COLLINS 

Stenographer. 

At  this  point  Mr.  Ruddiman,  of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith, 
who  had  been  absent  from  the  Chamber,  enters. 

Whereupon — 

(245) 


246 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

I  wish  to  state  to  you,  Mr.  Ruddiman,  that  the  subject  of 
the  payment  by  Daniel  Rosenthal  has  just  now  been  under 
inquiry.  The  Committee  having  been  informed  that  if  the 
matter  of  this  payment  could  be  made  plain  his  Honor,  the 
Mayor,  desires  to  assume  the  responsibility  for  it,  and  to  pay 
the  amount  into  the  City  Treasury.  If  you  have  any  cross- 
examination  to  make  of  the  witness  in  this  respect  you  are 
now  at  liberty  to  do  so. 

Mr.  Ruddiman  : 

At  an  earlier  stage  of  this  investigation  I  made  an  effort,  on 
the  invitation  of  the  Committee,  to  cross-examine  a  witness 
concerning  this  matter,  Avhen  I  was  informed  that  this  was  an 
ex  parte  proceeding,  and  that  I  could  not  further  proceed  in 
that  direction.  I  have  only  to  say  that  I  now  understand  my 
position,  and  will  maintain  my  self-respect  by  not  asking  any 
questions  of  the  witnesses. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

I  notice  the  presence  of  his  Honor,  the  Mayor.  Does  he 
desire  to  be  heard  before  the  Committee  ? 

Mr.  White,  of  counsel  for  the  Mayor  : 

We  have  handed  to  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  a  list  ot 
witnesses,  as  we  were  requested  to  do  yesterday — of  such  wit- 
nesses as  could  throw  light  upon  the  facts  that  have  been 
shown.  Having  been  shut  out  from  taking  an  active  part  in 
the  proceedings,  of  course  we  don't  propose  at  this  late  hour 
to  do  so.  But  we  have  furnished  to  the  Committee  the  means 
for  information,  and  we  presume  that,  as  they  are  anxious  to 
receive  information  on  this  subject,  it  will  be  their  pleasure  to 
call  the  witnesses  whose  names  we  have  given.  Their  names 
appear  on  the  paper  we  have  handed  in,  and  I  think  they  are 
all  present,  iucluding  my  client,  the  Mayor. 


247 


John  McLaughlin,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fies as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Where  is  your  residence  ? 
A.  1505  Green  street. 

Q.  We  have  been  listening  to 'the  proof  of  certain  charges 
made  against  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  in  the  management  of  his 
Department,  and  we  would  be  pleased  to  hear  any  statement 
you  have  to  make. 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  the  charo-es  that  I  have  seen  in 
the  papers  at  all.  I  came  here  at  the  request  of  General 
Stewart,  the  Chief  of  Police,  to  answer  any  questions  you  may 
have  to  put  in  relation  to  the  purchase  of  revolvers  and  ammu- 
nition.   I  have  no  other  knowledge,  except  on  that  subject. 

Mr.  White  :  I  desire  to  say  that  Mr.  McLaughlin  can  furnish 
all  the  facts  in  relation  to  the  revolvers,  their  price,  etc. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  ; 

Q.  Did  you  furnish  the  revolvers  to  the  Police  Department  ? 

A,  Yes,  sir.  I  will  say,  in  explanation,  that  during  the  time 
of  the  labor  troubles,  the  riots  in  different  parts  of  the  country, 
we  received  a  letter  from  Smith  &  Wesson,  manufacturers  of 
revolvers,  enclosing  a  copy  of  a  letter  from  General  Stewart, 
in  which  inquiry  was  made  about  the  rates  at  which  that  firm 
could  supply  revolvers  of  a  uniform  character,  weight  and 
calibre ;  and  they  requested  us,  as  their  agents,  to  see  the 
police  authorities  in  regard  to  the  matter.  I  called  on  General 
Stewart  and  stated  the  case.  He  said  that  they  proposed  to 
arm  the  police,  and  were  looking  around  for  the  best  revolvers 
at  a  moderate  price,  and  asked  what  our  quotations  on  them 
would  be.  I  gave  him  the  lowest  price  at  which  they  could  be 
had,  for  that  kind  of  a  pistol — of  32  calibre,  double  action, 
Smith  &  Wesson.    The  price  at  that  time  in  the  largest  quan- 


248 


tity  was  $9.35.  He  said  that  the  men  had  to  pay  for  these 
pistols  out  of  their  own  pockets,  though  probably  they  would 
be  reimbursed  by  Councils,  and  that  it  was  on  that  account 
that  he  wanted  to  have  the  price  as  low  as  possible,  and  said 
that  other  pistols  had  been  offered  him  at  lower  prices.  He 
requested  me  to  write  to  the  manufacturers,  stating  all  the 
circumstances,  and  see  if  we  could  not  get  an  abatement  in 
the  price.  I  said  that  the  firm  was  very  strongly  fixed  in 
their  prices,  and  I  did  not  think  they  would  make  a  reduc- 
tion ;  but  we  wrote  a  letter  to  the  manufacturers,  stating  the 
circumstances  in  the  case,  and  there  was  a  great  deal  of  cor- 
respondence and  telegraphing,  and  we  were  finally  authorized 
in  their  name  to  put  them  at  any  price  that  we  thought  proper. 
In  consequence  of  this  we  fixed  the  price  to  General  Stewart 
at  $7.50,  which  was  |1.85  below  the  lowest  wholesale  price. 
He  accepted  that  price  and  gave  us  the  order. 

Q.  Then  he  used  due  diligence  in  regard  to  getting  a  low 
price  ? 

A.  Well,  he  got  them  at  $1.85  lower  than  I  had  any  idea 
they  could  be  bought  for — $1.85  lower  than  the  lowest  price. 
If  you  were  to  give  an  order  for  a  thousand  of  them,  $9.35 
would  be  our  price, 

Q.  Are  they  as  good  a  pistol  as  could  be  had  for  that 
price  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  he  wanted  pistols  of  a  certain  weight  and 
calibre. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  supply  ? 

A.  The  order  was  for  fifteen  hundred,  and  we  supplied 
twelve  hundred  and  odd,  and  are  still  carrying  one  hundred 
and  fifty  until  the  time  when  there  are  funds  to  buy  them. 

Q.  So  he  bought  below  the  market  price  as  good  a  pistol  as 
any  other  in  the  market  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  $1.85  below. 


249 


Q.  Was  there  anything  extra  with  the  pistols  that  increased 
the  price  to  the  officers  ? 

A.  The  order  embraced  a  box  of  fifty  cartridges  for  each 
revolver,  and  a  leather  holster.  The  cartridges  were  charged 
to  the  police  at  the  lowest  price,  at  which  they  are  put  up 
by  the  million,  $6.60  per  thousand,  which  made  the  price 
for  fifty  cartidges  33  cents.  The  holsters  we  had  manufac- 
tured as  well  and  as  cheaply  as  possible,  at  $2.50  per  dozen, 
and  I  was  told  that  the  police  paid  cost  price,  33  cents  for  a 
box  of  cartridges  and  21  cents  for  the  holster,  making  the 
total  which  the  policemen  had  to  pay,  $8.04. 

Q.  Then  there  appears  to  have  been  nothing  made  out  of 
that  by  the  Department,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  Nothing,  whatever ;  I  think  the  policemen  could  get  a 
dollar  or  two  advance  on  each  pistol  to-day. 

Q.  Then  they  could  be  resold  at  a  profit  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


James  Stewart^  Jr.  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows  : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  I  am  the  Chief  of  Police. 

Q.  We  will  be  pleased  to  hear  any  statement  that  you  wish 
to  make  with  regard  to  these  charges  against  Mayor  Smith. 
You  are  probably  informed  about  them  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  will  say  that  I  am  in  ignorance  regarding 
most  of  the  charges.  The  only  thing  that  I  thought  especially 
affected  my  branch  of  the  service,  is  the  question  arising  as  to 
these  pistols.  There  are  some  other  things,  of  course,  about 
the  men  being  placed  upon  the  rolls,  and  the  way  in  which 
they  have  rendered  their  services  that  I  am  somewhat  familiar 
32 


250 


with.  I  am  ready  to  answer  any  questions  the  Committee 
shall  ask.  Also  I  can  give  some  information  regarding  the 
fines  imposed  upon  the  policemen.  That  was  a  question  that 
was  asked  Mr.  March  yesterday,  and  probably  I  can  give 
you  some  information  about  it. 

Q.  Please  tell  us  anything  you  want  to  about  that? 

A.  When  the  present  administration  first  went  into  power, 
my  first  punishment  for  a  slight  dereliction  consisted  of  charg- 
ing the  man — that  he  should  lose  his  pay  from  the  city.  After 
a  short  time,  however,  I  concluded  that  those  people  who  had 
rendered  services  to  the  city  and  received  no  pay  for  them, 
might  probably  have  just  cause  to  mandamus  the  city,  and  so 
I  changed  that  course  and  instituted  a  set  of  fines ;  but  in  a 
short  time  that  was  changed  again  and  we  concluded  not  to 
fine  them,  except  under  rare  circumstances,  but  to  suspend  a 
man  for  a  slight  dereliction  and  to  put  a  sub  on.  During 
1884  the  fines  that  were  imposed  upon  the  men  were  brought 
in  by  the  lieutenants,  after  the  men  had  received  their  pay, 
and  were  handed  directly  to  me,  and  I  paid  the  money  over 
on  the  same  day  to  the  City  Treasurer.  I  have  my  receipts 
from  the  City  Treasurer  for  them — the  same  day  when  I  got 
the  fines.  On  September  6th  I  turned  into  the  City  Treasury 
^69.02— in  1884.  On  October  7th,  $16.66  ;  on  October  10th, 
$9.52 ;  that  embraces  all  the  fines  for  that  year. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Upon  what  dates  had  those  fines  been  imposed  ? 

A.  In  the  month  preceding  that  in  which  they  were  turned 
into  the  City  Treasury.  If  they  were  fined  in  August  they 
would  not  get  their  warrants  until  September,  and  then  they 
were  turned  over  to  the  lieutenants,  and  they  would  take  the 
amounts, 

Q.  You  got  the  warrants  on  the  first  of  the  month  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  rarely  before  four  days,  and  sometimes  six  or 
seven  days  after. 


251 


Q.  Saj  that  you  got  them  on  the  fourth — you  ayouIcI  deduct 
the  fines  from  the  officers  punished  ? 
A,  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  done  with  the  money  ? 

A.  It  was  handed  to  me,  and  on  the  same  day  I  always 
sent  it  to  the  City  Treasurer. 
Q.  On  the  very  day  ? 

A.  The  very  day  received.  You  notice  that  the  largest 
amount  was  on  September  6th.  So  that  they  got  the  warrants 
on  the  4th,  then  the  next  day  the  lieutenants  would  bring  the 
money  down  if  it  was  not  a  Thursday,  which  was  the  lieuten- 
ants' day  off. 

Q.  And  you  turned  it  in  at  once  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir ;  I  can  say  that  I  did  that  regardless  of  any 
ordinance  that  required  it,  but  upon  principle,  as  I  never  want 
to  hold  money  that  don't  belong  to  me. 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  The  city  got  it? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  The  moneys  did  not  pass  through  the  Mayor's  office  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  He  knew  nothing  about  it? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  was  part  of  the  discipline  of  the  force  that 
he  entrusted  to  me.  Shall  I  tell  you  about  the  pistols,  or  are 
you  satisfied  on  that  point  ? 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  What  did  you  collect  in  1885  and  1886  ? 

A.  Very  little.  I  have  been  somewhat  careless  about  it 
from  this  fact,  that  it  was  so  very  rarely  that  fines  were  im- 
posed, but  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  immediately  handing 
them  to  Mr.  March.  As  to  the  dates  or  the  amounts  that  he 
received,  I  don't  know  that  I  can  tell  you,  because  no  ques- 


252 


tions  were  raised  about  the  amounts  paid  in.  The  fines  have 
been  only  imposed  in  particular  instances.  Since  the  patrol 
service  has  been  in  operation  we  fine  a  man  if  he  loses  a  day, 
in  case  he  can  give  no  proper  excuse  for  failure  to  report,  and 
for  a  repetition  we  charge  him  a  day's  pay,  and  make  him  pay 
the  cash  in.  In  July — it  was  paid  to  me  in  August — I  fined 
two  men  who  were  brought  before  Magistrate  Lennon,  and  be- 
haved in  an  unofiicer-like  manner,  and  I  read  a  letter  about  it 
which  was  read  over  the  desk,  and  fined  one  two  days'  pay, 
and  the  other  one  day's  pay. 

Q.  And  that  money  you  paid  into  the  hands  of  Mr.  March  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  When  it  was  paid  to  me  it  was  probably  in 
my  possession  a  couple  of  days,  until  he  would  come  to  the 
office.  Once  he  was  [away  sick.  Now,  regarding  the  pistols 
concerning  which  Mr.  McLaughlin  spoke.  When  the  difficulty 
occurred  between  the  police  and  the  rioters  in  Chicago,  we 
awoke  to  the  necessity  of  arming  our  police  force  properly  in 
order  to  meet  any  emergency.  I  found  that  they  were  armed 
with  pistols  of  their  own,  which  they  had  purchased  of  every 
conceivable  calibre  and  pattern,  and  that  probably  it  was  more 
dangerous  to  stand  in  the  rear  of  some  of  those  pistols  than 
in  front  of  them  if  they  would  happen  to  be  fired  off".  I  re- 
commended it  to  the  Mayor  to  have  our  force  armed  with 
Serviceable  weapons  of  a  uniform  calibre,  and  I  opened  nego- 
tiations to  that  effect.  I  communicated  first  with  Marvin, 
Hurlburt  &  Company.  Their  price  was  $8.50  independent  of 
the  cartridges  and  the  holster.  I  know  something  about 
weapons  myself,  and  I  had  a  preference  for  the  Smith  k 
Wesson  revolver,  provided  that  it  could  be  got  cheap  enough. 
Then  I  sent  a  communication  to  their  factory,  not  know- 
ing their  agents  in  this  city,  and  told  them  what  we  were 
about  to  do,  and  asked  them  for  their  lowest  figure  if  we 
should  give  an  order  for  probably  ten  or  twelve  hundred 
of  the  revolvers.  They  wrote  that  their  agents  here, 
E.  K.  Try  on  &  Co.  and  J.  C.  Grubb  &  Co.,  and  perhaps  they 
mentioned  others,  would  furnish  the  pistols  at  the  wholesale 


253 


price  of  $9.30  each,  which  was  too  much ;  and  I  then  wrote  a 
personal  letter  to  Mr.  McLaughlin,  stating  the  circumstances ; 
that  there  was  no  appropriation  made  by  Councils,  and  that 
it  would  be  too  much  of  a  burden  to  put  upon  the  men  to  ask 
them  to  pay  that  price,  and  asking  him  to  use  his  influence 
with  the  factory,  if  he  could,  in  order  to  get  them  at  a  less 
price ;  that  I  couldn't  accept  the  price  that  had  been  fixed, 
although  I  preferred  that  pistol.  In  the  meantime,  Marvin, 
Hurlburt  &  Co.  offered  me  a  drawback  of  $1,  which  brought 
their  price  down  to  $7.50.  During  the  negotiations,  when 
about  to  close  with  Marvin,  Hurlburt  &  Co.,  Mr.  McLaughlin 
brought  a  dispatch  from  Smith  &  Wesson,  telling  me  to  make 
a  price  the  same  as  was  offered  for  the  other  makes.  He 
asked  me  what  the  price  was,  and  I  told  him.  He  didn't 
know.  I  tojd  him  $7.50,  and  he  was  astonished.  But  he 
fixed  the  price,  and  said  you  are  getting  the  cheapest  pistol 
that  I  ever  knew  them  to  make  and  sell,  and  that  no  man,  if 
it  was  an  order  for  a  thousand  or  any  number,  or  no  matter 
what  the  number  was,  could  get  them  at  such  a  price.  But 
he  says  here  is  the  telegram  which  justifies  me  in  doing  so, 
and  I  accept  that  figure.  Then,  of  course,  we  wanted  car- 
tridges, and  wanted  pocket  holsters.  Those  things  we  fur- 
nished at  the  figures  named  by  Mr.  McLaughlin.  I  sent  an 
order  out  to  the  Police  Force  stating  the  necessity  for  every 
man  being  armed  with  a  serviceable  weapon,  and  stated  that 
we  would  negotiate  for  the  purchase  of  the  weapons  at  the 
lowest  price ;  and  I  told  the  lieutenants  to  take  the  names  of 
the  men  and  the  weapons  they  had  on  hand,  and  what  kind 
they  were,  so  that  we  could  know  how  many  men  ought  to  be 
supplied.  They  did  so.  I  had  stated  that  we  would  probably 
need  1,500,  but  I  purchased  1,208,  all  of  which  were  delivered 
and  paid  for.  Only  there  are  a  few  on  hand,  nine  or  ten, 
which  comes  from  the  fact  that  some  policemen,  who  had  en- 
gaged to  take  them,  fell  by  the  wayside,  and  didn't  care  to  go 
to  that  expense.  When  others  are  appointed,  they  will  pur- 
chase them. 


254 


By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  tell  the  Committee  anything  about  the 
special  officers,  concerning  whom  the  Committee  have  been 
inquiring  ?    You  know  the  testimony  ? 

A.  If  the  Committee  have  not  already  received  full  infor- 
mation on  that  subject  any  information  I  can  give  is  at  their 
service.  I  think  that  almost  everything  has  already  been  told 
before  the  Committee.  I  noticed  in  the  testimony  of  Mr. 
Gray,  yesterday,  that  in  giving  his  testimony  he  refused  to  give 
full  answers,  which  arose  from  the  fact,  I  presume,  that  when 
we  detail  a  detective  or  special  officer  upon  any  special  case  it 
is  strictly  secret  work.  You  can  understand  the  reason  for 
that.  But  I  think  he  might  have  clothed  his  answers  in  dif- 
ferent language  before  the  Committee.  He  went  too  far  in 
that  respect,  Mr.  Gray  was  discharged  from  the  force  under 
a  misapprehension  of  the  facts,  and  after  the  facts  became 
known  to  the  Mayor  he  desired  to  do  the  man  justice,  and  lie 
said  he  would  put  him  back  upon  the  force.  Mr.  Gray  pre- 
ferred not  to  go  back  on  the  detective  force,  and  said  that  he 
would  do  special  service,  and  we  then  assigned  him  to  the 
Fifth  District.  I  told  the  Lietenant  that  if  he  had  any  case 
or  any  service  in  that  District  that  he  could  put  him  on  that 
he  should  do  so,  and  I  then  detailed  him  for  a  number  of  dif- 
ferent secret  service  duties.  I  cannot  specify  them  just 
now.  I  was  under  the  impression  that  he  had  done  his  duty 
as  an  officer.  If  he  had  not,  of  course,  I  would  have  reported 
him  to  the  Mayor.  We  cannot,  of  course,  always  keep  track 
of  these  special  officers  when  they  are  out  on  the  streets. 
The  necessity  of  special  officers  instead  of  uniformed  men  can 
readily  be  seen — the  advantage  can  readily  be  seen.  The 
uniformed  officer  has  a  prescribed  beat — his  line  of  march  is 
defined,  whereas  the  special  officer,  who  goes  in  citizen's  clothes, 
can  go  everywhere,  in  every  part  of  the  city,  and  besides  can- 
not be  so  easily  discovered  by  the  criminal  classes,  as  men  in 
uniform.  Their  service  is  a  very  valuable  service,  and  it  could 
be  made  most  valuable  if  all  the  special  officers  were  best 
qualified  to  perform  their  duties. 


255 


Q.  Do  you  know  Warren  King  ? 
A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  There  was  such  a  man  on  the  force  ? 

A.  There  was. 

Q.  With  such  a  name  ? 

A.  There  was. 

Q.  You  don't  know  him  ? 

A.  Not  personally.  There  are  a  great  many  men  on  the 
force  that  I  dont'  know  in  that  way — only  that  they  are  on 
the  roster. 

Q.  Is  there  such  a  man  as  Warren  King? 
A.  There  is. 

Q.  Is  that  his  name — his  right  name  ? 

A.  That  I  won't  say.  But  he  did  such  service  as  is  repre- 
sented by  Warren  King  upon  the  force.  Chief  Kelly  came  to 
me  and  stated  that  he  had  a  man  who  could  render  incalcu- 
lable service  to  the  department  if  he  would  pay  him,  and  he 
wanted  to  know  if  the  man  could  be  put  upon  the  force.  We 
had  a  conversation  about  it,  and  I  stated  if  this  man  can  render 
particular  service  for  the  pay,  I  cannot  see  any  reason  why 
any  trouble  should  come  in.  Then  he  was  taken  and  sworn 
into  the  service,  and  I  presume  has  received  his  money  every 
month.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it  at  all,  from  the  fact  that  Chief 
Kelly  had  informed  me  about  it,  and  I  have  the  utmost  confi- 
dence in  the  integrity  of  Chief  Kelly.  Then  I  know  of  most 
valuable  service  which  has  been  rendered  through  this  man. 

Q.  How  many  men  of  that  sort  have  you  on  the  force  ? 

A.  I  cannot  call  to  mind.  Two  men  have  been  mentioned, 
but  I  don't  know  of  any  such  man  on  the  force  now.  I  don't 
know  of  any  man  who  is  drawing  pay  improperly.  There  is 
no  man  but  who  is  drawing  his  pay  properly  in  every  way. 
There  weae  two  men  mentioned — Lang  and  King.  My  answer 
regarding  Warren  King  will  apply  equally  to  Mr.  Lang. 


256 


Q.  What  service  did  John  F.  Smith  render  in  the  depart- 
ment ? 

A.  He  was  an  officer  assigned  to  the  fifteenth  district  where 
there  was  a  vacancy,  and  assigned  on  special  duty  at  the 
Twenty-fifth  district  station-house  to  superintend  the  alteration 
and  fitting  up  of  the  building,  and  to  see  that  all  the  material 
that  was  furnished  was  proper,  and  that  everything  was  good 
and  everything  was  carried  out ;  and  the  understanding  was, 
at  the  time  he  took  the  position,  that  as  soon  as  the  work  was 
completed  he  would  resign  his  position,  and  when  it  was  com- 
pleted about  the  3d  of  September  he  tendered  his  resignation. 
And  I  can  say  that  Mr.  Smith,  like  a  good  many  others,  was 
out, of  town,  but  that  when  I  saw  these  names  mentioned  I 
telegraphed  for  them  to  come  home  and  they  all  came,  and 
Mr.  Smith  came  with  the  rest.  I  have  no  doubt  that  he  is 
ready  to  testify  before  you.  He  was  here  yesterday,  and  I 
saw  him  around  this  morning. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  What  district  did  you  assign  Alexander  Gray  to  ? 

A.  The  fifth  district. 

Q.  Did  he  report  to  you  ? 

A.  To  me,  and  to  the  lieutenant,  of  course.  As  I  stated 
to  the  lieutenant,  he  could  have  him  whenever  he  needed  him 
for  any  service  unless  I  had  him  on  some  special  case. 

Q.  When  was  he  first  placed  on  the  roll  for  that  work  ? 

A.  From  the  date  of  his  appointment.  I  have  not  got  it  in 
my  mind  just  now.  It  was  somewhere  about  the  first  of  the 
year. 

Q.  The  Controller  told  us  that  he  appeared  continuously  to 
Tun  since  the  first  of  January  ? 

A.  It  commenced  from  the  time  that  he  was  put  in  the 
service. 

Q.  How  often  since  then  has  he  reported  to  you  ? 
A.  I  will  state  that  very  likely  I  have  seen  him  two  or  three 
hundred  times.    I  cannot  tell  how  many. 


257 


Q.  Would  he  come  to  you  daily  and  report  ? 
A.  No,  sir.    Sometimes  I  did  not  see  him  for  three  or  four 
days. 

Q.  Would  he  come  weekly  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    I  have  seen  him  oftener  than  once  a  week. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  any  special  duty  you  as- 
signed him  to  perform  in  any  particular  section  of  the  country  ? 

A.  I  assigned  him  in  connection  with  another  officer  to  go 
to  Pottstown,  and  if  I  recollect  I  sent  him  once  somewhere 
else ;  but  I  don't  know  where.  I  cannot  tell  just  where  he 
was  on  duty,  but  I  sent  him  out.  I  would  like  to  say,  further, 
that  he  was  instructed  to  work  in  connection  with  the  detec- 
tives on  any  occasion  on  which  they  needed  his  services,  and 
he  has  done  such  w^ork.    He  has  so  reported  to  me. 

Q.  Can  you  call  to  mind  how  long  he  remained  at  Pottstown 
on  police  duty  ? 

A.  A  couple  of  days. 

Q.  Can  you  call  to  mind  whether  you  have  sent  him  any- 
where else  ? 

A.  I  think  I  have,  but  I  cannot  specify  just  now. 

Q.  Did  you  send  him  to  New  York  on  police  duty  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  almost  daily  we  have  to  send  some  of  the 
officers  to  New  York. 

Q.  Did  you  send  him  to  Atlantic  City  on  police  duty? 

A.  I  never  sent  him  there  on  police  duty ;  he  had  my  per- 
mission to  go  there  in  this  way  :  We  exact  from  the  officers  of 
the  Department  when  they  move  that  they  must  get  permis- 
sion from  the  Department ;  Mr.  Gray  asked  permission  to 
move,  I  think  about  two  months  ago,  from  the  house  he  lived 
in  in  the  Twenty -eighth  Ward ;  he  said  that  his  family  were 
sick,  and  he  thought  that  it  would  do  them  a  great  deal  of 
good  if  they  should  go  to  live  in  Atlantic  City  for  a  couple  of 
months,  and  he  asked  me  if  there  was  any  objection  to  his 
taking  his  family  down  there  where  he  could  go  every  now  and 
then  when  he  had  no  special  duty  to  perform — when  he  could 
33 


258 


just  jump  on  a  train  and  go  down  there ;  I  told  him  that  I  did 
not  know  of  any  objection  to  that. 

Q.  That  was  about  two  months  ago  ? 

A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  How  often  since  has  he  reported  to  jou  for  duty. 

A.  Certainly  I  have  seen  him  once  a  week,  and  sometimes 
I  have  seen  him  three  or  four  times  a  week. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  you  are  concerned,  you  have  no  particu- 
lar knowledge  that  he  has  been  doing  police  duty  all  the  time  ? 

A.  Not  daily  ;  it  is  just  the  same  as  with  all  special  officers. 

Q.  Who  certified  to  his  time  ? 

A.  The  lieutenant  of  the  district. 

Q.  Whom  did  he  get  the  information  from  ? 

A.  He  took  it  on  the  assumption  that  when  a  man  is  de- 
tailed for  duty  outside  he  makes  full  time,  otherwise  it  would 
be  reported  to  me. 

Q.  Some  of  the  officers  have  said  that  they  got  the  time  from 
headquarters  where  the  specials  were  assigned  for  duty  ? 

A.  I  think  that  was  meant  with  reference  to  the  special  roll 
at  headquarters,  which  Gray  was  not  on. 

Q.  That  had  reference  to  such  men  as  Stanwood  and  Tait, 
and  King  and  Bye. 

A.  Well,  Tait  and  Bye  are  on  the  special  roll ;  the  others 
are  on  the  district  rolls  ;  whether  those  rolls  are  certified  to 
by  Mr.  March  as  Chief  Clerk  I  cannot  say ;  I  never  certified 
to  them. 

Q.  How  so;  it  was  Gray's  duty  to  report  to  Lieutenant 
Usilton  ? 

A.  Not  regularly ;  these  special  officers  report  to  the  lieu- 
tenants when  their  duties  are  confined  to  the  district. 

The  evidence  we  have  before  us  as  given  by  Chief  Kelly 
concerning  this  man,  is  as  follows  : 

Q.  Do  you  know  Alexander  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


259 


Q.  Does  he  report  to  you? 

A.  No,  sir ;  that  was  a  mistake  of  the  Lieutenant. 

Q.  What  part  of  the  department  does  he  report  to  ? 

A.  I  believe  he  is  under  Chief  Stewart,  but  I  am  not 
positive  about  that.  I  have  seen  him  up  and  down  in  the 
Chiet's  office.    That  is  Chief  Kelly's  testimony. 

Q.  He  did  not  report  to  you  ? 

A.  I  don't  believe  he  did. 

Now,  Lieutenant  Usilton  testifies  as  follows  : 

Q.  Do  you  know  A.  K.  Gray  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  has  he  been  on  the  rolls  in  your  department  ? 
A.  He  went  on  January  1,  1886. 
Q.  Is  he  still  on  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  sort  of  work  does  he  do  ? 

A.  He  is  on  special  duty  under  the  charge  of  Chief  Kelly ; 
that  is  an  error. 

Lieutenant  L^silton  further  testifies  as  follows  : 
Q.  Does  Officer  Gray  ever  report  to  you  ? 
A.  I  have  seen  him  frequently. 
Q.  What  is  his  name  ? 

A.  I  always  thought  he  had  a  middle  name  ;  now  they  say 
it  is  plain  Alexander  Gray. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  known  him  ? 
A.  Some  time. 

Q.  How  long  has  he  been  in  the  service  ? 
A.  Fifteen  or  sixteen  years. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  ? 

A.  He  was  a  patrolman  for  some  years. 

Q.  And  then  what  ? 

A.  Then  a  detective  awhile  down  here. 


260 


Q.  He  is  the  man  commonly  known  as  Alec  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  is  on  your  roll  as  A.  K.  Gray  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  get  his  time  from  Chief  Kelly  ? 
A.  Well,  if  he  loses  any  time  they  would  report  it  to  me 
and  I  would  dock  him. 

Q.  Now  in  the  light  of  that  evidence,  how  was  it  possible 
for  him  to  receive  pay  for  each  one  of  the  months  that  have 
expired  since  the  first  of  January  ?  He  makes  no  report 
to  the  Chief  of  Detectives,  and  he  doesn't  report  to  the 
Lieutenant  of  the  district  to  which  he  was  assigned,  and 
you  say  you  have  not  seen  him  daily,  yet  he  has  been  draw- 
ing his  pay  daily  ? 

A.  I  couldn't  see  him  daily  as  he  was  sometimes  sent  out 
on  special  <luty,  and  I  remember  an  instance  when  he  was 
with  the  Fire  Marshal  at  one  time.  Frequently  he  w^ould  be 
sent  to  New  York  and  he  couldn't  report  daily,  and  Lieuten- 
ant Usilton  was  right  from  the  simple  fact  that  a  man  would 
have  to  report  at  stated  hours  daily  or  be  marked  absent  with- 
out leave.  In  the  case  of  Special  Gray  he  couldn't  report 
daily  to  him,  and,  therefore  he  didn't  report  in  that  sense  of 
the  word. 

Q.  So,  according  to  Lieutenant  Usilton 's  testimony,  to  whom 
this  man  Gray  was  not  responsible  for  any  of  his  acts  upon 
any  particular  day,  when  the  Lieutenant  made  up  the  time,  it 
was  upon  information  from  headquarters,  representing  that  it 
was  from  Chief  Kelly  when  he  made  up  the  allowance  ? 

A.  That  is  a  mistake ;  he  has  fallen  into  a  very  natural 
error.  In  regard  to  an  order  assigning  a  man  coming  from 
headquarters,  and  knowing  what  was  his  particular  line  of  duty, 
he  has  taken  it  for  granted  that  he  reported  to  Chief  Kelly. 
Such  is  not  the  fact.  I  used  him  to  get  a  variety  of  secret 
information  that  I  wanted,  and  that  information  I  suppose  I 
laid  before  Chief  Kelly. 


261 


Q.  Had  he  any  police  duty  to  perform  at  Atlantic  City  this 
summer  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  to  my  knowledge,  except  getting  hold  of 
some  cases  while  he  was  down  there  about  parties  in  this  city. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  he  was  some  two  or  three  months  at 
Atlantic  City? 

A.  I  only  know  that  from  what  has  been  stated  m  the  news- 
papers. He  can  best  answer  that  himself.  I  have  no  knowl- 
edge of  it  myself — that  Special  OiFicer  Gray  was  there  for  two 
or  three  months.  If  he  or  any  other  officer  would  go  olf  for 
two  or  three  months  he  would  be  dropped  from  the  roll.  You 
can  take  it  for  granted  that  there  could  be  no  such  instance 
known  and  that  officer  remain  on  the  roll.  I  know  he  has 
rendered  a  great  deal  of  service,  but  as  to  accounting  for  every 
day  of  his  time,  that  I  can't  do. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Mr.  Gray  testified  here  yesterday  and  answered  the 
questions  put  to  him  just  as  it  suited  him.  He  said  that  he 
was  appointed  about  January  1st,  on  the  force. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  of  the  time  since  that  time  to  the  present  there 
were  about  two  months  that  he  couldn't  account  for.  That  had 
reference  to  the  time  spent,  I  presume,  in  Atlantic  City.  Now 
you  resided  there  this  summer  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Of  course  you  had  opportunities  of  seeing  him  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  he  was  whole  days  and  weeks  there 
together  ? 

A.  I  could  not  state  that  fact.  While  I  have  been  at  Atlantic 
City  for  the  last  two  years  I  have  been  there  only  one  day  on 
a  week-day.  Consequently  when  I  got  there  at  night  I  would 
have  very  little  opportunity  to  see  him.  I  do  not  suppose 
during  the  summer  that  I  saw  Officer  Gray  in  Atlantic  City  ; 


262 


or  I  can't  recollect  seeing  him,  or  having  met  him  more  than 
on  three  occasions  until  within  the  last  two  weeks,  when  he  was 
working  up  a  case  of  robbery  down  there. 

Q.  He  had  every  appearance  of  a  gentleman  who  had  sum- 
mered there  ? 
A.  Well,  yes. 

Q.  With  the  healthy  glow  and  ruddy  look  that  attaches  to 
people  who  live  at  the  seashore  or  in  the  mountains.  He  was, 
of  course,  not  very  communicative  to  us,  I  will  tell  you,  because 
he  said  it  was  against  the  interest  of  the  Police  Department. 
You  have  been  much  more  communicative  than  he  was. 

A.  Well,  I  would  like  to  state  that  there  was  no  occasion 
on  his  part  to  withhold  an  answer  to  any  question  of  the  kind 
as  to  whether  he  was  down  there  or  whether  he  spent  his  time 
at  Atlantic  City.  That  is  not  one  of  the  secrets  of  the  police 
service.  The  secrets  of  the  police  service  are  where  in  certain 
cases  men  are  sent  to  ferret  out  matters,  and  of  course  they 
are  confidential.  Such  cases  of  course  you  know  of.  I  know 
of  a  great  many  of  them,  and  I  know  that  in  them  Mr.  Gray 
performed  service.  As  to  whether  he  took  up  his  residence 
and  spent  the  major  portion  of  his  time  there  for  the  last  two 
months  in  Atlantic  City,  I  can't  say.  I  can  say  that  I  have 
seen  him  once  a  week  and  sometimes  oftener  in  Philadelphia 
at  my  office. 

Q.  He  was  discharged  through  a  misapprehension,  I  under- 
stand ? 

A.  He  was.  The  Mayor  desired  to  do  the  man  justice  after 
he  had  got  at  the  exact  facts  of  the  case.  The  cause  of  his 
discharge  was  apparently  a  very  just  one,  but  when  we  ar- 
rived at  the  facts  in  the  case  the  Mayor  found  that  he  had 
made  a  mistake  as  to  the  facts,  and  he  reappointed  him. 

Q.  How  many  patrolmen  have  you  on  the  force  ? 
A.  Twelve  hundred  and  fifty — that  is,  what  we  call  patrol- 
men. 


263 


Q.  I  mean  other  than  lieutenants  and  sergeants  and  detec- 
tives. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  of  those  1,250  patrolmen  are  detailed  for 
special  duty  ? 

A.  We  generally  make  it  a  point  to  have  two  special  officers 
in  each  district. 

Q.  How  many  districts  are  there  ? 

A.  There  are  twenty-four  districts,  or  twenty-five,  counting 
in  the  reserves. 

Q.  The  new  district  is  not  organized  yet  ? 
A.  No,  sir.    They  have  twenty-four  stations,  and  the  Cen- 
tral Station,  which  makes  twenty -five. 

Q.  Then  that  would  make  fifty  of  these  officers  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  We  have  in  the  First  District  at  present  only 
one,  and  only  one  on  the  Reserves.  He  does  night  duty  at 
the  Central  Station. 

Q.  How  many  specials  have  you  at  present  ? 
A.  We  have,  with  the  exception  of  the  First  District  and 
the  Reserves,  I  believe  two  in  each  district. 

Q.  One  district  was  testified  to  yesterday  as  having  five  in 
it — the  Frankford  District,  I  think ;  but  I  am  not  sure  about 
it. 

A.  I  think  that  is  a  mistake. 

Q.  Where  is  Lieutenant  Dungan  ? 

A.  In  the  Fifteenth  District — Frankford. 

Q.  He  has  five  specials  ? 

A.  Not  on  duty  in  the  district. 

Q.  No;  but  detailed  from  that  district,  and  chargeable 
against  the  district. 

A.  Did  he  mention  the  names  ? 

Q.  Yes. 

A.  Well,  I  can  better  tell  you  if  I  know  the  names. 


264 


Q.  Well,  Ash  is  one.    What  are  his  duties  ? 

A.  He  was  appointed  to  fill  a  vacancy  which  occurred  in 
the  Fifteenth  District,  and  was  assigned  to  Captain  Quirk, 
whose  duty  it  is  to  see  about  what  is  called  enforcing  ordi- 
nances— over  the  whole  district. 

Q.  Who  had  filled  that  position  before — anybody  ? 
A.  A  man  by  the  name  of  McClurg,  but  he  was  very  sick, 
recently,  and  unable  to  go  around. 

Q.  Now,  after  Mr  Ash  was  Mr  Baldwin  ? 
A.  He  was  a  lieutenant  of  the  district. 
Q.  That  is  two  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  will  read  to  you  from  the  testimony  given  before  us  by 
Lieutenant  Dungan,  which  is  as  follows : 

"  Q.  How  many  special  officers  have  you  on  your  roll  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  Baldwin  is  one,  and  who  is  the  other  ? 
A.  Ash. 

Q.  Are  you  accustomed  to  carrying  two  or  more  ? 

A.  Accustomed  to  carrying  two. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  lieutenant  ? 

A.  Since  August,  1884. 

Q.  Since  that  time  have  you  carried  more  than  two  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  carried  two  all  the  time  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  have  carried  one  ? 

A.  I  carried  one  until  Ash  was  appointed. 

Q.  Only  Mr.  Baldwin  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  special  officer  ? 

A.  I  have  one  patrolman,  detailed,  acting  as  a  special  officer, 
wearing  citizen's  clothing.  That  is  a  special  officer  for  the 
district." 


265 

Q.  That  is  very  true.  I  will  read  to  you  further  from  his 
testimony  : 

"  Q.  In  the  district  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  mean  detailed  out  of  the  district.  You  have  only  two 
detailed  out  of  the  district — Ash  and  Baldwin  ? 

A.  There  are  three  men  besides  those  detailed  out  of  the 
district. 

Q.  What  are  their  names  ? 

A.  Harry  Stan  wood,  who  is  detailed  in  Court,  and  John 
Wear,  who  is  detailed  to  Chief  Kelly.  Harry  Stanwood  is 
carried  upon  the  detective  office  roll." 

Q.  And  he  says  further  :  "John  Wear  who  is  detailed  to 
Chief  Kelly." 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

And  Alfred  Bye  ? 

A.  Alfred  Bye  is  Avhat  is  called  a  horse  detective. 

Q.  That  makes  five  out  of  that  one  district  ? 

A.  Bye  w^as  formerly  in  the  Twenty-first  District,  and  was 
transferred  to  the  Fifteenth  District.  He  and  Stanwood  are 
both  detailed  at  headquarters,  under  Chief  Kelly. 

Q.  How  many  such  officers  are  there  in  the  several  districts. 
You  have  stated  there  were  two  in  each  district,  and  you  have 
been  referring  to  one  district  where  there  were  three. 

A.  I  can  give  them  all  to  you.  In  the  First  District  there 
is  one  special. 

Q.  Is  that  one  over  and  above  two  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  altogether.  In  the  Second  District  there  are 
two.  If  there  are  any  other  specials  it  is  only  for  temporary 
duty. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Just  give  us  the  districts  as  they  come.    How  many  are 
there  in  the  First  District  ? 
A.  One. 
34 


266 


Q.  These  men  don't  come  out  of  the  districts  ? 
A.  Thej  are  specials  in  the  districts,  but  sometimes  go  out 
of  them. 

Q.  But  as  a  rule  they  are  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  how  many  in  the  Second  District  ? 
A.  In  the  Second  District,  two. 
Q.  The  Third  District  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  The  Fourth  District  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  The  Fifth  District  ? 
A.  Three. 

Q.  Why  are  there  three  ? 

A.  Mr.  Gray  is  the  extra  man  assigned  to  that  district. 

Q.  Well,  the  Sixth  District  ? 

A.  There  are  three. 

Q.  Who  is  the  third  man  ? 

A.  John  Sheddon,  who  is  assigned  to  duty  in  the  Equip- 
ment Bureau. 

Q.  In  the  Seventh  District  ? 
A.  One. 

Q.  In  the  Eighth  District  ? 
A.  There  are  two. 

Q.  In  the  Ninth  District  ? 

A.  There  is  one  regular  special  and  one  man  detailed  as  a 
special. 

Q.  To  do  duty  in  the  district  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  the  Tenth  District  ? 
A.  There  are  two. 

Q.  The  Eleventh  District  ? 
A.  One. 


267 


Q.  And  the  Twelfth  District  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  The  Thirteenth  District  ? 
A.  One. 

Q.  The  Fourteenth  District  ? 

A.  I  think  we  have  one  special  there. 

Q.  And  the  Fifteenth  District  ? 

A.  There  are  three. 

Q.  What  is  the  third  man  for  ? 

A.  They  are  Ash  and  Baldwin  and  a  patrolman.  This  is 
not  including  two  men  placed  on  the  rolls  down  at  head- 
quarters— Stanwood  and  Bye. 

Q.  Now,  give  us  the  Sixteenth  District;  how  many  men 
are  there  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  And  the  Seventeenth  District. 
A.  Two. 

Q.  The  Eighteenth  District  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  The  Nineteenth  District  ? 
A.  I  believe  we  have  two  there. 

Q.  And  the  Twentieth  District? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  Now,  the  Twenty -first  District  ? 
A.  One. 

Q.  And  the  Twenty-second  District  ? 
A.  Three. 

Q.  Why  do  you  have  three  there  ? 

A.  We  have  one  for  Captain  Albright,  the  same  as  in  Cap- 
tain Quirk's  district,  to  go  over  the  district  and  enforce  the 
ordinances. 

Q.  Who  is  that  man  ? 
A.  Mr.  Rulon. 


268 


Q.  What  do  the  other  two  do  ? 
A.  Special  service  in  the  district. 
Q.  Who  are  they  ? 
A.  Fulton  and  Vanderslice. 

Q.  Now,  how  many  are  there  in  the  Twenty-third  District  ? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  And  in  the  Twenty-fourth  District? 
A.  Two. 

Q.  Do  you  have  any  specials  in  the  Reserves  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  was  under  the  impression  that  this  man  Wear 
was  on  the  Reserve  roll,  but  you  called  him  as  coming  from 
some  other  district. 

Q.  From  Lieutenant  Dungan's  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  was  under  the  impression  he  was  on  the 
Reserves. 

Q.  What  are  the  limits  of  Captain  Albright's  Division  ? 
A.  His  command  embraces  the  Twenty-second  and  Twenty- 
third,  and  Thirteenth  and  Fourteenth  Districts. 
Q.  What  section  of  the  city  ? 
A.  The  northwest. 
Q.  West  of  what  street  ? 

A.  West  of  Broad  street  and  north  of  Girard  avenue.  It 
is  Germantown,  Manayunk,  the  Falls  of  Schuylkill,  &c. 
Captain  Quirk  s  Division  embraces  all  northeast. 

Q.  As  I  understand  it,  the  number  of  specials  which  you 
have  given  in  each  district  are  the  men  who  do  particular  duty 
in  those  districts  ?  , 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Mr.  Gray  has  been  upon  special  service  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Sheddon  has  done  special  service  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Ash  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


269 


Q.  And  Mr.  Baldwin  ? 
A.  Partly  special  service. 
Q.  And  Mr.  Stan  wood  ? 
A.  Special  service. 
Q.  And  Mr.  Rulon  ? 
A.  Special  service. 

Q.  What  would  you  define  as  the  character  of  the  service  of 
Mr.  Gray  to  distinguish  it  from  the  service  done  by  Mr. 
Sheddon  ? 

A.  Well,  it  is  really  detective  service. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Sheddon  is  connected  with  the  Equipment 
Bureau  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Mr.  Ash  has  charge  of  enforcing  city  ordinances  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Baldi^in? 

A.  He  is  on  duty  in  the  district  occasionally  and  attends  to 
the  receiving  of  coal,  and  attends  sometimes  to  the  repairs  in 
the  station  houses. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Stanwood  is  in  the  court  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  every  day. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Bye? 

A.  He  is  at  headquarters  and  takes  charge  of  cases  of  horse 
robbery. 

Q.  And  Mr.  Rulon  ? 

A.  He  reports  to  Captain  Albright  to  aid  in  enforcing  or- 
dinances. 

Q.  According  to  what  you  have  said  to  the  Committee,  it 
seems  that  Mr.  Ash  has  charge  of  the  duty  of  enforcing  city 
ordinances  in  that  section  bounded  on  the  west  by  Broad 
street  and  south  by  Gira^d  avenue.  He  takes  in  all  that  sec- 
tion of  the  city  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


270 


Q.  Why  do  you  not  have  specials  to  enforce  those  ordi- 
nances in  the  portion  of  the  city  south  of  those  districts  ? 
A.  We  have. 
Q.  Who? 

A.  We  have  Officer  Milampy  and  another  man  by  the  name 
of  Daly. 

Q.  What  district  has  Mr.  Milampy  charge  of? 
A.  The  Twentieth. 

Q.  Is  he  one  of  the  specials  there  ? 

A.  He  is  a  special  under  charge  of  the  captain. 

Q.  Who  is  the  other  man  ? 

A.  Daly. 

Q.  What  district  is  he  assigned  to  ? 

A.  The  Sixteenth.  I  think  Milampy  is  under  Captain 
Brown,  and  Daly,  under  charge  of  Captain  Edgar. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  being  detailed  to  "  enforce  city 
ordinances  "  ? 

A.  Well,  they  go  along  the  street  and  where  there  are  signs 
up  in  violation  of  ordinances,  about  which  neighbors  to  them 
complain  almost  daily.  They  look  up  and  see  if  there  are  any 
signs  in  that  way,  and  they  endeavor  to  correct  that. 

Q.  What  other  ordinances  do  they  enforce  ? 

A.  Where  there  are  any  nuisances  they  see  they  must  re- 
port them.  In  a  great  many  cities  they  have  a  regular  force 
for  that  purpose — ordinance  sergeants — officers  whose  duty  it 
is  to  go  about  in  the  day-time  and  attend  to  the  enforcement 
of  city  regulations. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  to  prevent  the  regular  patrolmen  from 
attending  to  this  duty  ? 

A.  Well,  they  don't  dare  to  leave  their  beats,  and  conse- 
quently they  cannot  follow  such  things  up. 

Q.  Why  is  it  necessary  to  leave  their  beats  ?  Suppose  that 
a  sign  is  hung  contrary  to  law,  would  it  not  be  their  duty  to 
take  cognizance  of  it,  and  report  it  to  the  Department  ? 

A.  It  ought  to  be. 


271 


Q.  And  if  the  garbage  is  not  collected  would  it  not  be  their 
duty  to  report  it  to  the  Department  ? 

A.  We  have  such  reports  coming  in  constantly. 

Q.  Then  don't  you  think  these  specials  could  be  dispensed 
with? 

A.  They  could,  undoubtedly  ;  but  at  the  same  time  they 
are  valuable  in  that  particular  line.  We  have  their  reports, 
and  I  want  to  satisfy  your  minds  that  they  are  very  full  of 
information,  and  full  of  a  great  deal  of  good  work  that  is  per- 
formed by  these  officers. 

Q.  What  sorts  of  reports  are  they  ? 

A.  They  make  regular  reports  to  the  Captains  of  the 
Divisions. 

Q.  Verbally  or  in  wanting  ? 

A.  In  wanting.  They  contained  the  number  of  parties  no- 
tified, and  the  arrests  made,  and  the  fines,  and  so  on.  These 
officers  look  after  the  licenses  of  the  hucksters — see  to  it  that 
they  have  licenses. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  that  these  special  officers  make  reports  to 
the  captains  ;  do  the  captains  report  to  you  ? 

A.  They  report  once  a  year  in  full  to  headquarters. 

Q.  That  is  the  only  report  you  get  ? 

A.  We  get  special  reports  on  special  cases.  We  are  always 
doing  that  when  they  want  to  ask  advice. 

Q.  When  Mr.  Gray  does  duty,  does  he  report  verbally  or 
in  writing  ? 

A.  Verbally. 

Q.  Not  in  writing  ? 

A.  He  has  never  been  required  to. 

Q.  How  many  cases  has  he  reported  to  you  since  the  first 
of  January  ? 

A.  That  would  be  a  difficult  matter  to  say. 
Q.  Well,  about  ? 

A.  Well,  he  has  reported  to  me,  I  should  say,  thirty  or 
forty  different  cases.    I  do  not  know  the  number. 


272 


Q.  How  many  within  the  last  two  months  ? 

A.  There  were  some  small  cases  and  some  cases  of  some 
importance.  I  suppose  he  would  average  a  couple  of  cases  a 
week — would  average  that  many.  In  the  summer  time  we 
have  many  men  on  duty  outside  of  this  man  mentioned. 
Sometimes  we  place  the  whole  house  squad  on  duty  at  a  place 
where  we  fear  it  may  be  overrun  by  a  mob.  In  such  a  case, 
we  place  that  squad  on  duty.  Sometimes  it  inay  be  only  a 
part  of  the  squad,  and  sometimes  the  whole  squad,  in  citizens' 
clothes.    Of  course,  it  is  only  a  temporary  measure. 

Q.  Now,  in  the  Sixteenth  district  you  have  accounted  for 
three  special  officers.  You  gave  us  Mr.  Daly.  Can  you  call 
to  mind  the  names  of  the  others  ? 

A.  Johnson  and  Stevens. 

Q.  .Are  there  any  other  officers  there  doing  special  duty  ? 
A.  There  may  be,  but  I  cannot  call  the  fact  to  mind  just 
at  present. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Officer  McKinley — whether  he  is.  on  the 
pay  roll  ? 

A.  He  is  a  new  officer. 

Q.  What  does  he  do  ? 

A.  He  was  ordered  to  report  to  Captain  Edgar,  to  look 
after  the  enforcement  of  ordinances  aud  nuisances. 
Q.  Then  he  helps  Officer  Daly  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Officer  Andrews,  on  the  pay  roll  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  his  duty  ? 

A.  He  has  been  an  assistant  to  Mr.  March  in  the  office  at 
headquarters. 

Q.  What  assistance  has  he  been  rendering  there  ? 

A.  I  believe  he  has  been  filling  out  warrants,  or  the  stubs 
thereof ;  I  don't  know  particularly. 

Q.  Were  not  Councils  informed  when  they  made  an  appro- 
priation for  a  secretary  and  additional  clerks  at  headquarters 


2T3 


that  no  more  patrolmen  would  be  taken  from  the  districts  and 
put  to  work  in  the  Mayor's  office  ? 

A.  I  know  there  was  something  of  that  kind. 

Q.  But  still  Mr,  Andrews  was  taken  off  to  do  that  work  ? 
A.  I  don't  think  he  has  been  taken  on  there  since  the  ordi- 
dance  passed. 

Q.  Where  is  he  located  ? 
A.  At  headquarters — at  a  desk. 
Q  How  long  has  he  been  there  ? 
A.  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  How  long  has  it  been  since  he  performed  any  duty  in 
his  district  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you.  I  don't  think  he  ever  performed  any 
duty  in  his  district.  I  think  he  has  always  been  on  detail 
duty — since  his  appointment. 

Q.  What  duty  does  Mr.  Andrews  perform — do  you  say  ? 

A.  I  should  call  him  an  assistant  to  Mr.  March. 

Q.  And  what  is  the  character  of  the  labor  he  peforms  ? 
A.  I  have  noticed  him  with  the  warrant  book,  filling  up 
either  the  body  of  the  warrants  or  the  stubs. 

Q.  Can  you  give  me  the  name  of  the  man  who  occupies  the 
position  of  warrant  clerk  in  the  Department  ? 

A.  It  is  Ezra  Lukens.  He  may  be  considered  an  assistant 
to  him  instead  of  to  Mr.  March.  But  I  know  he  is  working 
there. 

Q.  He  is  working  there  now  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    Mr.  March  is  no  longer  in  the  office. 

Q.  No.    I  see  that  he  is  resigned  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  should  there  be  two  officers  in  the  Sixteenth  Dis- 
trict to  enforce  ordinances,  or  in  that  section,  and  only  one  in 
the  other  section  ? 

A.  Well,  I  can  only  say  that  it  is  a  very  important  district. 
West  Philadelphia  covers  a  great  deal  of  territory, — the 
35 


274 


Twenty-fourth  and  Twenty-seventh  Wards.     It  is  almost 
impossible  for  one  man  to  get  over  the  entire  district.  West 
Philadelphia  is  about  as  large  as  a  man  can  travel  over. 
By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  As  I  understand  it,  you  have  said  that  the  special  officers 
could  be  dispensed  with  and  the  duties  they  perform  could  be 
performed  by  the  patrolman  ? 

A.  It  could  be  done,  but  not  so  effectively. 

Q-.  It  is  an  important  matter,  because  it  involves  sixty  or 
seventy  patrolmen,  practically  ? 

A.  The  appointment  of  two  special  officers  for  special  de- 
tective service  in  each  district  I  consider  an  absolute  necessity. 
It  has  always  been  done,  and  we  have  done  it.  We  have  not 
done  it  on  account  of  having  a  precedent  for  it,  but  because,  as 
I  said  before,  special  officers  who  are  thoroughly  alive  to  their 
duties  can,  therefore,  do  work  of  incalculable  value  to  the  city. 
I  would  rather  have  four  of  them  than  two  if  we  are  sure  that 
they  would  be  diligent  and  effective  in  their  work  in  the  dis- 
tricts. These  crooked  people  know  the  officers  in  uniform — 
know  just  where  their  beats  extend  ;  know  when  they  go  one 
way,  and  know  when  they  come  back,  so  that  they  know  just 
when  to  ply  their  vocation.  They  know  the  patrolmen  cannot 
get  back  before  a  certain  time.  They  cannot  get  on  to  officers 
in  citizens  clothes  as  quickly.  Therefore  this  a  valuable 
branch  of  the  service.  I  am  speaking  of  special  detective 
service  in  the  districts. 

Q.  You  are  referring  now  principally  to  robberies  ? 
A.  Robbing  and  sneak-thieving,  and  disreputable  people. 
Q.  Are  these  specials  on  duty  in  the  day-time  or  in  the 
night-time  ? 
A.  Both. 

Q.  I  mean  the  specials  in  the  district  ? 

A.  Both.  Sometimes  they  take  their  sleep  in  the  daytime 
and  sometimes  in  the  nighttime.  We  have  specials  that  have 
been  on  duty  for  nearly  twenty-four  hours  at  a  time.    We  lost 


275 


one  very  valuable  officer  in  the  Fifteenth  District  by  his  re- 
maining on  duty  forty-eight  hours  on  Frankford  Creek  to 
watch  criminals — day  and  night.  He  contracted  a  disease  by 
that  service  from  which  he  died  very  shortly — within  ten  days. 
Then  it  frequently  occurs  again  that  the  duties  of  these  men 
are  very  light  for  the  time  being,  and  they  may  not  need  to  be 
on  duty  at  night.  It  is  their  duty  to  go  around  to  the  thea- 
tres, for  instance.  I  want  them  to  go  to  the  theatres  and 
railroad  stations  and  wherever  a  crowd  congregates.  The  first 
thing  they  have  to  do  is  to  become  familiar  with  the  faces  of 
those  people  from  photographs  that  we  have  at  headquarters. 
Then,  wherever  a  crowd  congregates  it  is  the  duty  of  these 
special  officers  to  mix  in  with  the  crowd  and  see  if  any  of  these 
people  are  there.  We  have  had  during  this  summer  nearly 
4,000  houses  reported  as  vacant,  where  the  families  have  left 
and  gone  out  of  the  city  and  left  valuables  in  the  houses.  Up 
to  the  1st  of  August  the  reports  show  only  six  reports  of  rob- 
beries of  those  houses — that  only  that  number  occurred.  .  In 
two  of  these  cases  we  recovered  the  property  and  arrested  the 
robbers,  and  in  another  case  we  recovered  a  portion  of  the 
property,  but  did  not  arrest  the  robbers.  That  shows  how 
active  we  are  obliged  to  be.  An  officer  has  to  go  to  such  a 
house  and  try  the  front  door  and  the  rear  doors  once  during 
his  tour  of  duty.  The  orders  from  headquarters  are  that  the 
specials  are  to  look  out  for  these  empty  houses.  Of  course, 
they  cannot  do  it  as  thoroughly  as  the  officers,  because  they 
cannot  get  over  so  much  territory. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Yesterday,  when  the  Chief  of  Detectives  was  on  the 
stand,  I  asked  him  with  regard  to  Warren  King  and  William 
Lang.  I  asked  him  this  question — "  Is  there  a  class  of  de- 
tective work  to  be  performed  in  which  the  persons  who  per- 
form it  should  not  be  known  by  any  person  except  yourself?" 
His  answer  was — "Yes,  sir;  it  is  quite  necessary  to  perform 
such  duty."    Do  you  corroborate  that  statement  ? 


276 


A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  do.  I  consider  it  the  most  efficient  service 
the  Department  can  have. 

Q.  Again  I  asked  him  this  question — "  In  such  a  case  you 
take  a  person  or  persons  and  give  them  an  assumed  name  on 
the  pay  roll,  so  that  it  shall  not  he  possible  for  them  to  be 
known  as  being  connected  with  your  Department?"  His 
reply  was — "  Yes,  sir,  I  do.  It  is  to  cover  up  their  identity." 
Again  I  asked  him — ^  Is  it  to  prevent  their  identification  that 
you  draw  the  warrants  of  those  persons,  and  receipt  for  them 
and  draw  the  money  and  pay  them  the  money  ?"  His  answer 
was — "  Yes,  sir."    Is  that  the  fact  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  draws  the  warrants  of  those  persons  under  those 
assumed  names,  and  receipts  for  them  and  gets  the  money, 
and  gives  the  money  to  the  persons  acting  under  those  assumed 
names  in  the  performance  of  secret  service  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  to  prevent  their  identification  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  for  their  personal  safety  and  to  guarantee  that  they 
can  continue  their  w^ork  without  being  known  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  told  Chief  Kelly  that  when  he  came  before 
this  Committee,  to  say  to  the  Committee  that  the  necessities  of 
the  service  demanded  that  these  men  should  not  be  produced 
in  public.  But  if  the  Committee  in  executive  session  desires, 
or  if  any  member  of  the  Committee  desires  it — because  these 
men  are  bona  fide  men — they  will  come  forward  and  swear 
that  they  received  their  pay.  They  have  done  good  service. 
While  it  is  a  system,  however,  which  has  been  adopted  for  the 
advantage  of  the  City  to  a  large  extent,  still  it  is  a  system 
which  I  can  readily  see  can  be  abused.  Therefore  we  have 
taken  hold  of  it  very  tenderly,  and  we  do  not  have  any  men 
of  that  kind  on  the  force  to-day. 

Q.  You  say  you  have  no  man  of  that  kind  on  the  force  to- 
day? 


277 


A.  No,  sir.  It  became  dangerous  for  them  to  continue  their 
work,  and  their  services  to  the  department  were  therefore  ren- 
dered valueless.    I  think  one  was  dropped  last  year  and  

Q.  King  left  the  force  in  December,  1885  ? 
A.  They  are  no  longer  on  the  force. 

Q.  And  the  other  was  retained  until  May,  1886  ? 
A.  Until  three  months  ago,  I  guess. 

Q.  When  there  was  no  further  use  for  his  services  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  there  is  nobody  acting  in  his  place? 

A.  No,  sir.  We  have  use  for  the  service  of  people  of  that 
kind,  but  inasmuch  as  this  inquiry  has  come  up,  I  am  glad 
that  we  have  none  on  the  force  at  present. 

Q.  Why  so  ? 

A.  Because  it  is  a  system  which  might  be  abused  if  it  was 
in  dishonest  hands,  and  we  do  not  want  to  be  placed  in  such  a 
position. 

Q.  You  don't  consider  it  was  abused  by  you  ? 

A.  No — it  was  not.  But  these  things  are  apt  to  be  misun- 
derstood by  the  public.  Of  course,  when  the  charges  were 
made  it  was  the  supposition  that  there  were  no  such  parties 
as  these  named,  but  that  others  w^ere  drawing  their  pa3^ 

Q.  But  they  had  ceased  to  be  on  the  rolls  before  these 
charges  were  made  ? 
A.  That  is  very  true. 

Q.  Then  why  do  you  now  feel  ghid  that  you  have  no  such 
people  on  the  force  ?  If  you  had  such  men  on  the  force  would 
it  not  only  corroborate  you  that  there  was  such  service  ? 

A.  No— I  don't  see  it  in  that  way.  I  will  say  that  I  con- 
sider it  a  very  valuable  service — if  we  were  authorized  to  em- 
ploy these  men.  But  we  have  no  authority  to  employ  people 
of  the  kind  ;  although  the  INIayor,  in  his  power  to  swear  in 
officers  as  policemen,  I  suppose  thought  he  had  the  right  to 
take  the  men  and  detail  them  for  special  service. 


278 


By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  one  question,  because  mention  of  the 
matter  has  been  made  in  the  newspapers.  Is  it  true  that  Mr. 
Gray  was  a  special  officer  at  the  Temple  Theatre  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  I  never  heard  that  except 
through  the  newspapers. 

Q.  Did  you  assign  him  to  duty  specially  at  the  theatre  ? 

A.  I  did  not.  As  I  remarked  awhile  ago,  we  want  these 
officers  to  go  to  the  theatres  and  railroad  stations,  and  wherever 
crowds  congregate.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  his  receiving  any 
pay  from  the  theatre.  I  brought  the  question  home  to  him 
and  he  assured  me  that  he  had  not. 

Q.  What  special  duty  is  Officer  McKinley  on  ?  He  helps 
Daly? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  true  he  is  also  garbage  contractor  ? 

A.  I  understand  not.  I  believe  that  he  failed  to  carry  out 
his  contract  and  it  was  annulled.  That  was  before  he  was  in 
the  Department — before  his  appointment  on  the  force. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Are  officers  detailed  to  keep  order  outside  of  Philadelphia 
County  ? 

A.  Sometimes. 

Q.  How  are  they  paid  while  doing  such  duty  ? 

A.  We  detail  officers,  for  instance,  at  Chester  County  Fair. 
We  have  always,  for  a  number  of  years,  how  many  I  don't 
know,  had  two  or  four  officers  from  Philadelphia  there  to  assist 
then  at  the  Fair.  They  pay  the  officers,  and  the  officer's  places 
on  the  pay  roll  are  filled  by  substitutes.  In  other  words,  they 
have  leave  of  absence  during  that  time,  as  an  accommodation 
to  these  people.  It  is  the  same  as  in  the  case  of  the  officer  at 
Atlantic  City  during  the  summer ;  a  man  named  Geiger,  who 
is  on  the  reserve  force,  and  who  was  given  leave  of  absence 
during  that  time,  and  they  paid  him  there.  W^hen  he  report* 
back  for  duty  he  will  go  on  again. 


279 


Q.  I  have  seen  it  stated  that  at  points  near  by  Philadelphia^ 
as  at  Neshaminy  Falls,  or  places  of  that  kind,  you  have  de- 
tailed officers.  Was  that  under  the  same  circumstances  as  at 
the  Chester  County  Fair  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  We  have  sent  officers  up  there  on  the  trains 
going  from  Ninth  and  Green  streets  to  Neshaminy  Falls,  for 
instance.  We  have  been  requested  by  the  railroad  officials  to 
do  that,  thinking  that  sometimes  parties  might  be  riotous  within 
the  city  limits.  The  officers  who  are  sent  are  what  are  called 
the  house  detail.  They  lose  no  time,  and  they  are  very  glad 
to  go  on  these  excursions.  For  instance,  the  men  in  the  house 
this  morning  do  not  go  on  until  this  evening,  and  they  could 
go  away  on  such  excursions.  We  also  detail  officers  for  balls 
and  weddings,  etc.  In  such  cases  they  are  paid  by  the  parties 
engaging  their  services,  and  their  places  on  the  rolls  are  filled 
by  substitutes,  which  gives  the  substitutes  a  chance  to  do  some 
work. 


John  L.  Linton  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ?  "  ■ 

A.  I  am  Secretary  to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  ? 

A.  I  attend  to  the  correspondence  connected  with  the  office, 
keep  a  record  of  all  ordinances  passed  by  Councils  which  are 
approved  by  the  Mayor ;  I  attend  to,  seal  and  record  all  com- 
munications made  by  the  City  of  Philadelphia;  attend  to  the 
receipt  of  all  moneys  for  licenses  and  issue  them,  and  generally 
perform  some  other  small  duties. 


280 


Q.  Now,  you  understand  the  subject  we  are  considering,  and 
the  Committee  would  be  pleased  to  hear  from  you  any  state- 
ment you  have  to  make  ? 

A.  In  regard  to  the  matter  of  licenses,  Mr.  Chairman  and 
gentlemen,  I  will  say  that  in  the  latter  part  of  1885,  about  the 
first  day  of  September,  his  Honor  directed  me  to  make  a  full  and 
complete  examination  as  to  how  the  licenses  were  collected 
from  the  pawnbrokers,  and  generally  everything  connected 
with  them  ;  and  also  an  examination  of  the  law  carefully  to 
ascertain  what  the  requirements  were  under  it.    I  made  this 
examination  in  obedience  to  the  order,  and  made  a  report  to 
the  Mayor.    In  my  report  I  stated  that  from  a  list  that  had 
been  paid  in  the  last  year  of  ex-Mayor  King,  there  were  83 
pawnbrokers.    This  list  I  obtained  from  those  that  had  paid, 
and  from  the  business  directory  published  that  year  in  the 
City  of  Philadelphia.    That  was  for  1884.    Of  this  number, 
83,  I  found  that  there  were  13  who  had  either  not  paid,  or  if 
so,  it  had  never  been  reported  to  the  City  Treasurer — the 
money  had  never  been  paid  to  the  City  Treasurer ;  I  found, 
also,  that  the  number  that  had  paid  were  70,  paid  under  ex- 
Mayor  King's  administration,  and  of  the  70  but  7  had  filed 
policies  of  fire  insurance,  and  those  policies  I  found  to  be 
worthless,  though  they  were  alive,  from  the  fact  that  they  did 
not  contain  the  clause  which  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  ordered 
should  be  in  all  policies  received  by  him — which  clause  is  in- 
serted into  the  body  of  the  policy,  and  designates  that  the  loss, 
if  any,  shall  be  payable  to  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia.   It  is  not  a  transfer  of  the  policy,  but  simply  a  clause 
put  in  the  body  of  it.    A  policy  deposited  without  that  clause 
is  a  worthless  piece  of  paper.    The  law,  we  presume,  intended 
it  should  be  of  value,  and  this  insertion  was  made  by  direction 
of  the  present  Mayor.    I  also  examined  the  bonds  in  the  last 
year  of  Mayor  King,  and  I  found  very  few  of  them  executed. 
Some  of  them  were  signed  simply  by  the  parties  who  owned 
the  licenses,  and  others  Avere  not  signed  at  all,  and  none  of 
them  were  witnessed.    The  number  properly  executed  I  do 


281 


not  now  recollect,  but  it  was  very  small.  I  reported  these 
facts  to  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  William  B.  Smith.  He  then 
gave  me  positive  directions  that  in  the  collections  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  year  1885  they  should  all  be  compelled  to  com- 
ply with  the  law,  by  depositing  a  proper  policy  of  $5,000 
insurance  with  that  clause  inserted  in  the  body  of  it,  as  well 
as  a  properly  executed  bond  of  $1,000.  Upon  being  called 
upon  by  the  brokers  I  informed  them  of  this  fact.  A  very 
large  number  of  them  objected  to  carrying  it  out.  Invariably 
they  informed  me  that  it  had  not  been  done  in  the  past,  and 
that  they  didn't  see  the  propriety  of  it,  that  they  didn't  think 
it  was  the  law.  I  told  them  I  simply  had  to  carry  out  my 
orders  from  the  Mayor ;  that  he  expected  me  to  attend  to  all 
the  details  connected  with  the  matter,  and  that  when  they 
were  consummated  or  ^fulfilled  according  to  law  it  was  my 
duty  to  report  to  him  the  fact,  giving  the  names  of  the  bonds- 
men as  well  as  the  policy  of  insurance  accompanying  it,  for 
his  final  approval  of  both  the  bond  and  the  policy  of  insurance. 
During  this  time,  January,  1885,  I  received  their  one  hundred 
dollars  for  the  payment  of  the  licenses.  Many  of  them  did 
not  at  the  time  deposit  the  policy  of  insurance.  Som.e  of  them 
executed  the  bond  and  others  did  not.  The  matter  extended 
along  through  1885  until  very  near  the  close  of  it  before  the 
proper  execution  of  the  law  w^as  fulfilled  by  them.  As  I  have 
said  before,  in  the  details  of  all  matters  connected  with  the 
receipt  of  moneys  and  the  carrying  out  of  the  law  with  refer- 
ence to  the  pawnbrokers'  and  all  other  licenses,  the  Mayor 
depended  upon  me  executing  his  orders,  w^hich,  in  every  par- 
ticular, I  fulfilled  to  the  best  of  my  ability — to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge  as  to  the  requirements  under  the  law.  When  a 
number  had  fulfilled  the  law  I  w  ould  report  that  to  the  Mayor, 
and  if  it  was  approved  make  out  the  licenses,  present  them  to 
him  for  his  signature,  and  then  he  would  give  me  a  check 
which  I  would  send  immediately  to  the  City  Treasurer.  Some 
parties  executed  the  law  immediately  upon  the  payment  of  the 
money,  but  very  few.  Those  that  did  I  may  have  retained 
36 


282 


until  a  number  could  be  had,  in  order  to  save  trouble  to  both 
the  City  Treasurer  and  others,  so  that,  a  number  going,  it 
would  make  but  one  errand.  In  that  way  I  did  it.  I  do  not 
know  that  I  have  anything  further  to  say  on  the  subject  of 
pawnbrokers. 

Q.  When  did  you  go  into  office  ? 
A.  On  April  7,  1884. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  thirteen  pawnbrokers  that  had  not 
paid  at  that  time,  do  you  mean  that  had  not  paid  for  the 
year  1884? 

A.  Not  at  that  time.  I  made  no  examination  until  about 
the  first  of  September.  The  examination  in  connection  with 
the  pawnbrokers  was  not  made — for  this  reason,  that  they  had 
all  paid  prior  to  April  7,  1884 ;  in  other  words,  the  collections 
under  ex-Mayor  King  were  between  the  1st  of  January  and 
the  1st  of  April  for  all  pawnbrokers'  licenses. 

Q.  Was  any  effort  made  to  close  up  the  pawnbrokers  that 
did  not  comply  with  the  law  ?  Some  of  them  you  have  sworn 
did  not  comply  with  the  law  ? 

A.  That  transaction  was  under  Mayor  King. 

Q.  But  under  your  administration  ?  We  are  only  question- 
ing you  with  regard  to  the  years  1885  and  1886.  Now  some 
of  them  have  sworn  that  they  did  not  comply  in  those  years  ? 

A.  It  is  entirely  their  own  fault.  Notice  after  notice  had 
been  sent  by  me  that  non-compliance  existed.  They  disre- 
garded them — that  they  were  not  bound  to  execute  the  law — 
that  they  had  not  done  it  previously. 

Q.  Then  did  you  make  any  efforts  to  close  them  up  ? 
A.  No  effort  of  the  kind  was  made. 

Q.  You  allowed  them  to  go  on  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  in  the  hope  that  they  would  fulfil  the  law.  I 
thought  that  a  little  leniency  should  be  exercised  in  the  matter, 
as  it  was  an  absolutely  new  thing  to  them  to  comply  with  the 
requirements  of  the  law. 


283 


Q.  Did  you  issue  any  licenses  in  1885,  before  December? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  got  a  list  of  those  licenses  issued,  and  when  ? 
A.  I  have  not  here. 

Q.  How  early  in  1885  were  they  issued  ? 
A.  June  and  July  and  August ;  I  am  not  sure  of  it,  but  I 
think  that  is  the  fact. 

Q.  I  understood  you  that  you  would  keep  the  money  wait- 
ing a  little  while,  until  you  had  enough  to  send  to  the  City 
Treasurer  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  did  not  want  to  send  one,  two,  or  three,  but 
when  there  were  seven,  eight,  nine,  or  ten. 

Q.  So  you  waited  until  July  until  you  handed  in  the  first  ? 
A.  I  think  it  was  July. 

Q.  Did  not  a  large  proportion  of  them  pay  in  January  ? 
A.  So  they  did. 

Q.  Yet  you  kept  them  waiting  until  July  ? 

A.  They  did  pay  in  January,  but  they  had  not  complied 
with  the  law,  and  therefore  the  licenses  could  not  be  issued 
until  they  did.  My  report,  when  they  complied  with  the  law, 
was  made  to  the  Mayor,  submitting  everything  connected  with 
the  matter  for  his  approval ;  and  it  was  made  when  a  batch  of 
them  could  be  had,  in  order  to  save  time  and  trouble. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  up  to  July  only  about  eight  or 
ten  had  complied  with  the  law  ? 

A.  I  cannot  remember  the  number  without  a  further  exami- 
nation into  the  matter.  I  don't  know  the  number  that  paid  ; 
afterwards  it  was  paid  throughout  the  year  from  that  time  on 
until  December. 

Q.  Up  to  Jul}^,  then,  not  enough  had  complied  with  the  law 
in  all  respects  to  make  it  an  object  to  have  their  licenses  issued, 
or  put  through  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not  think  so. 


284 


Q.  Will  you  now  tell  us  about  the  checks  ? 

A.  My  rule  invariably,  when  a  check  was  presented,  pay- 
able to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  was  to  refuse  it ; 
when  I  took  charge  of  the  money  I  thought  it  was  too  large 
an  amount  to  keep  in  the  fireproof,  and  I  made  the  suggestion, 
I  believe,  or  I  induced  the  Mayor  to  place  them  in  his  account ; 
his  book  was  loaned  to  me  from  time  to  time,  and  it  was 
placed  to  his  credit  in  the  bank ;  I  took  the  checks  that  had 
been  given  to  him  and  told  him  what  they  were ;  in  many  in- 
stances he  never  saw  the  face  of  the  checks,  but  endorsed  them 
so  that  the  deposit  might  be  made  ;  when  any  check  of  that 
sort  was  offered  to  me,  payable  to  the  City  Treasurer,  I  told 
the  party  that  I  could  not  accept  it ;  in  many  instances  they 
would  alter  them  themselves,  or  they  made  a  new  check ; 
probably,  in  one  or  two  instances  maybe,  I  altered  the  check, 
but  if  so,  it  was  done  with  a  full  knowledge  and  consent  of  the 
party  drawing  the  check  and  in  no  other  way  ;  as  I  said  before, 
these  checks  of  the  money  received  daily  when  in  bank  hours 
were  sent  to  the  bank  either  by  the  Mayor  or  by  myself ;  I  made 
•up  the  ticket  for  the  deposit  often,  and  during  the  absence  of 
the  Mayor  his  bank  book  was  left  with  me  for  that  purpose  ; 
any  checks  requiring  endorsement  were  retained  by  me  until 
his  return  ;  in  this  way  the  money  was  disposed  of ;  when  I 
said  it  was  deposited  daily  it  may  have  been  in  some  instances 
a  day  or  two  afterwards  from  some  cause — I  cannot  tell  now 
what ;  but  there  was  no  delay  in  depositing  all  the  money  im- 
mediately on  its  receipt  in  the  manner  that  I  have  told  you  ; 
that  is  all  I  have  to  say  so  far  as  that  is  concerned. 

Q.  Were  those  checks  of  Harvey  and  McGarry  drawn  in 
■the  office  of  the  Mayor,  or  brought  there  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Who  changed  those  checks  or  altered  them  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that  they  are  altered.  I  have  never  seen 
them.  I  know  this  fact,  however,  that  if  I  received  them,  and 
if  they  were  changed  from  "  City  Treasurer "  they  were 


285 


changed  to  the  order  of  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor.  I  know 
this  fact,  because  I  declined,  positively,  to  receive  any  check 
unless  it  was  drawn  to  the  order  of  the  Mayor  or  payable  to^ 
bearer.  That  I  am  positive  cibout,  and  on  my  oath  I  declare 
that  this  is  the  fact. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  statement  to  make  in  regard  to  any 
other  transaction  ? 

A.  Well;  I  have  with  regard  to  the  collection  of  the  coal 
oil  licenses.  In  the  latter  part  of  1885  the  Mayor's  attention 
was  called  to  the  collection  of  coal  oil  licenses  or  rather  to  the 
execution  of  the  law  by,  I  think,  the  Board  of  Fire  Under- 
derwriters  and  other  citizens  in  Philadelphia.  Ex-Marshal 
Wood,  who  was  then  the  Fire  Marshal,  told  me  that  he  meant 
to  urge  the  Mayor  to  permit  him  to  execute  that  law.  He 
asked  me  if  I  would  not  urge  it  upon  him.  He  said  to  me 
tw^o  or  three  days  after  that  he  had  made  inquiry  of  the  City 
Solicitor,  whose  opinion  he  had  that  all  the  persons  keeping 
for  sale  coal  oil  were  liable  for  a  license — wholesale  dealers 
and  retail  dealers  alike — of  $10.  He  also,  after  getting  the 
consent  of  the  Mayor,  issued  notices  to,  I  presume,  200  or  300 
persons  whom  he  supposed  were  liable.  The  wholesale  dealers 
were  prompt  in  their  payments.  I  think — no,  I  don't  think, 
for  I  know — that  under  his  administration  as  Fire  Marshal  31 
of  the  wholesale  dealers  paid  me.  They  also  paid  the  Fire 
Marshal's  fee  for  surveying.  I  am  a  little  ahead  or  a  little 
too  fast  in  my  report  of  this  matter.  I  want  to  say  here  that 
the  Fire  Marshal  urged  me  to  collect  for  him  his  survey  fee. 
This,  at  first,  I  declined  to  do.  He  became  more  urgent,  and 
said  to  me  that  as  I  collected  the  license  money  it  would  be  an 
easy  thing  to  collect  his  survey  money,  and  in  his  own  lan- 
guage, he  said  to  me  that  if  I  would  do  it  he  would  cut  it  in 
two — would  cut  the  survey  fee  in  two. 

By  Mr.  Iseminger : 

Q.  How  do  you  mean  cut  it  in  two  ? 
A.  Well,  that  was  his  own  language. 


286 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  How  did  you  construe  it  ? 

A.  Well ;  that  is  what  he  said.  After  some  consideration 
I  agreed,  but  rather  reluctantly  to  collect  his  survey  fees. 
When  they  were  collected  he  would  come  in  daily  every  morn- 
ing into  my  room  and  for  the  day  previous  received  from  me 
his  regular  fee  for  survey.  He  also  received  the  fees  of  thirty 
retailers  who  paid  a  fee  for  surveying  of  $5  instead  of  $10,  as 
the  wholesalers  did.  Under  the  law  it  was  his  duty  to  make  a 
full  report  to  the  Mayor  of  the  places  that  he  would  survey,  in 
order  to  judge  whether  or  not  the  party  would  be  entitled  to  a 
license  under  the  law.  Of  these  surveys  made,  but  26  out  of 
the  61  have  been  filed  with  me  in  the  office  under  Marshal 
Wood.  He  has  received  the  pay  of  61,  but  has  reported  the 
surveys  of  but  26. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Does  that  comprise  all  that  you  have  to  state  with  regard 
to  coal  oil  licenses  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  will  give  you  another  point  with  regard  to 
the  pawnbrokers  with  your  permission.  The  charge  has  been 
made  that  I  have  been  in  receipt  from  each  of  the  pawnbrokers 
of  $e5,  as  a  present,  as  it  has  been  called,  I  believe,  from  the 
reports  I  have  seen  in  the  newspapers.  Every  pawnbroker  in 
Philadelphia  knows  that  it  is  his  duty  to  present  me  with  a 
bond  properly  filled  up  for  the  one  thousand  dollars,  instead 
of  which  I  filled  them  myself  and  prepared  them  ready  for  the 
signatures.  That  probably  may  have  made  them  feel  under 
some  obligations  to  me.  But  I  never  made  or  never  thought 
of  making  any  charge  whatever  for  it.  I  here  say  that  some 
few  of  them  did  present  me  with  $5,  but  a  great  many  did  not, 
in  consequence  of  my  insisting  on  their  spending  $30,  which 
they  had  been  relieved  from  previously  for  the  fire  insurance. 
There  was  no  charge  whatever  made  by  me  in  any  one  single 
case  and  no  demand  was  made  by  me. 


287 


Q.  What  are  the  facts  in  relation  to  the  two  pawnbrokers 
who  claim  to  have  paid,  but  who  did  not  appear  to  have  re- 
ceived credit  for  their  money — Daniel  Rosenthal  and  Mrs.  Etta 
Hymens  ? 

A.  All  the  money  received  by  me,  as  I  said  before,  was 
•daily  returned  to  the  Mayor,  unless  he  was  absent  from  the 
city,  and  was  deposited  in  bank.  All  the  moneys  paid  by  me 
I  kept  a  correct  memorandum  of,  and  I  don't  think  I  could 
have  made  a  mistake ;  I  know  in  fact  that  I  could  not  of  the 
payment  of  $100  to  me.  I  am  sure  I  could  never  have  made 
that  mistake.  I  have  no  record,  no  account,  no  memorandum, 
no  nothing  connected  with  the  two  pawnbrokers  you  speak  of. 

Q.  Is  it  customary  for  these  people  to  execute  their  bond 
before  paying  the  money? 

A.  They  do  sometimes ;  sometimes  before  and  sometimes 
after,  and  sometimes  at  the  time  when  the  money  is  paid.  And 
sometimes  the  deposit  of  the  policy  is  made  prior — in  a  num- 
ber of  cases. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  all  the  moneys  paid  to 
you  were  paid  to  the  Mayor  on  the  day  you  received  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  may  reply  that  the  small  amounts  for  coal- 
oil  licenses,  and  the  amounts  for  amusement  and  powder 
licenses,  were  not  paid  to  the  Mayor  at  all,  but  retained  by  me 
in  the  fire-proof  until  called  for  by  the  Mayor,  when  the 
licenses  would  be  issued  and  the  money  dispatched  to  the  City 
Treasury, 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  that  in  1884  you  had  an  inquiry 
made  in  order  to  ascertain  how  many  pawnbrokers  were  doing 
business  in  Philadelphia  ? 

A.  No,  sir — to  ascertain  generally  the  mode  transacting  the 
business  under  the  previous  administrations. 


288 

Q.  Was  it  not  your  endeavor  to  ascertain  how  many  pawn- 
brokers were  in  the  city  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  But  in  my  efforts  to  make  a  proper  report  to 
the  Mayor  I  reported  that  fact. 

Q.  How  many  pawnbrokers  are  on  record  as  doing  business 
in  Philadelphia  to-day  ? 

A.  Eighty. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  in  1885  ? 

A.  Seventy-five.  In  the  year  previous  sixty-four,  the  year 
previous  seventy-two.  For  years  back  there  never  have  been 
eighty  who  paid. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  have  knowledge  you  collected  from  all  in 
the  year  1885  ?  " 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  What  was  it  you  said  your  instructions  were  in  regard 
to  the  issuing  of  these  licenses  ? 

A.  That  they  first  had  to  be  submitted  to  the  Mayor  for  his 
approval. 

Q.  That  is  the  licenses  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  the  bond  and  policy  of  fire  insurance. 

Q.  Detail  to  us  what  your  requirements  were.  Suppose 
that  a  man  came  in  and  said  that  he  wanted  to  be  licensed  as 
a  pawnbroker,  what  would  you  say  to  him  ? 

A.  I  would  ask  him  for  his  bondsman  and  for  his  policy  of 
fire  insurance. 

Q.  What  else  ? 

A.  And  then  for  the  payment  of  the  license 

Q.  Of  course,  when  a  man  had  been  engaged  in  business  at 
the  same  place  for  a  number  of  years,  and  had  been  in  good 
standing,  he  is  not  to  be  asked  for  testimonials  of  character  ? 

A.  I  scarcely  ever  did  ;  the  facts  were  very  well  known 
through  our  police  force,  and  so  we  knew  if  there  were  some 
to  whom  licenses  should  not  be  issued.  That  is  the  case  this 
year. 


289 


Q.  But  where  a  man  had  been  engaged  in  the  business  for 
a  number  of  years  would  you  take  it  for  granted  that  he  was 
in  good  standing  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  take  that  for  granted,  and  would  not  ask  for 
testimonials  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  first  request  the  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  a  policy  of  insurance  ? 
A.  Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  ask  him  to  pay  the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  did  you  ask  him  to  execute  the  bond  first  ? 

A.  1  merely  told  him  the  requirements — I  merely  made 
known  to  him  the  requirements  of  the  law. 

Q.  Then  you  would  ask  him  first^for  the  bond  and  then  for 
the  insurance  policy  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  for  the  one  hundred  dollars  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  did  you  demand  the  bond  and  the  policy  of  in- 
surance before  receiving  the  money  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  why ;  in  some  instances  they  paid  it  first 
and  in  others  they  did  not ;  in  some  cases  they  would  present 
the  bond  afterwards. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  after  going  into  office — at  any  time 
since,  read  the  law  which  relates  to  the  licensing  of  pawn- 
brokers ? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  Was  it  because  you  read  that  ordinance  that  you  first 
asked  for  the  bond  and  then  for  the  insurance  policy,  and  then 
for  the  fee  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was,  but  I  am  not  sure;  I  think  that  is  the 
fact. 

37 


290 


Q.  This  is  the  ordinance  you  regulated  your  actions  by  (in- 
dicating a  book) ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  I  find  that  this  ordinance  of  January  19,  1856, 
reads  as  follows  : 

Every  pawnbroker  so  applying  for  a  license  shall  first 
effect  an  insurance  against  fire  for  $5,000,  on  goods  pawned, 
the  policy  for  which  shall  be  deposited  with  his  bond,  before 
the  said  license  is  given  him." 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  you  had  a  clear  comprehension  of  the  requirements 
of  the  ordinance? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  they  were  scarcely  ever  fulfilled — only 
in  five,  six,  seven  or  eight  cases,  all  told. 

Q.  Is  there  any  instance  in  which  you  accepted  the  license 
fee  without  the  bond  being  executed  and  the  policy  of  insur- 
ance tendered  ? 

A.  There  was.  • 

Q.  Under  what  circumstances  ? 

A.  Well,  perhaps  the  bondsman  was  not  able  to  come  in  on 
that  date,  or  could  not  for  two  or  three  days,  and  the  parties 
would  promise  that  they  certainly  would  bring  them.  So  it 
was  done  more  to  accommodate  them  than  anything  else. 
There  never  was  any  intention  of  violating  the  law.  It  was 
done  just  as  any  gentlemen  would  do  in  business. 

Q.  You  would  leave  the  matter  go  over  for  a  day  or  two  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Or  a  few  days.  Some  of  them  are  not  exe- 
cuted to-day. 

Q.  But  that  was  not  the  rule  in  the  department  ? 

A.  No  positive  rule  was  made  in  regard  to  it.  It  was  in 
order  to  have  no  trouble  with  them. 

Q.  Y^ou  say  it  was  the  exception  and  not  the  rule,  that  as  a 
rule  the  bond  would  be  tendered,  though  in  some  instances  the 
matter  would  go  over  for  a  few  days  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


291 


Q.  As  a  rule  they  Avould  execute  the  bond,  and  give  you  the 
insurance  policy  and  the  fee  ? 

A.  Not  in  all  cases — not  in  half  of  them — not  a  third. 
Probably  a  third  would  exceed  the  amount. 

Q.  But  I  asked  you  the  question,  and  you  have  already 
said  that  you  had  a  clear  comprehension  of  the  ordinance  of 
1856,  and  of  all  the  requirements  of  that  ordinance,  applying 
to  the  licensing  and  issuing  of  licenses  to  pawnbrokers.  So 
you  knew  that  the  bonds  should  be  executed,  and  the  insurance 
policy  given,  and  that  the  fee  of  $100  should  be  paid. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Under  what  circumstances,  then,  could  you  justify  your- 
self in  taking  a  fee  without  the  bond  was  executed  and  the  in- 
surance policy  tendered  ? 

A.  It  was  done  as  I  have  stated. 

Q.  In  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.  To  accommodate  the  parties  applying,  and  I  thought  it 
would  fulfill  the  law. 

Q.  Have  you  accepted  the  fee  without  the  bond  and  insur- 
ance policy  ? 

A.  It  has  been  done. 

Q.  If  you  would  do  that  how  long  would  you  permit  the 
man  who  paid  that  fee  to  go  on  conducting  his  business  without 
entering  his  bond  and  delivering  the  policy  ? 

A.  That  is  a  part  of  the  business  with  which  I  had  nothing 
to  do  ? 

Q.  Would  you  inform  his  Honor,  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  I  have  often  done  that. 

Q.  Of  the  delinquent  pawnbrokers  ? 

A.  When  they  failed,  or  were  unable,  or  did  not  come  up 
for  a  long  interval  of  time  I  informed  the  Mayor.  I  repeatedly 
did  it,  and  during  the  interval  I  have  notified  them  time  after 
time,  asking  them  to  come  and  fulfill  the  law. 


292 


Q.  So,  from  time  to  time  you  would  report  to  the  Mayor 
the  pawnbrokers  that  were  delinquent  ? 

A.  I  may  have  done  that  when  the  time  was  so  long  that  I 
thought  the  Mayor  should  have  knowledge  of  the  fact. 

Q.  Now  I  find  that  some  of  the  witnesses  we  have  had  be- 
fore us  here,  swear  that  they  complied  with  all  your  require- 
ments. For  instance  Solomon  L.  Linse,  a  pawnbroker,  who 
testified  that  on  the  9th  of  January,  '85,  he  paid  you  a  fee  of 
$100,  and  at  the  same  time  executed  a  bond  and  left  with  you 
his  policy  and  gave  you  a  check — at  the  same  time  fulfilling 
all  the  requirements  of  the  law  ?  What  reason  had  you  for 
not  issuing  that  man  his  license  at  once  ? 

A.  The  explanation  that  I  made  in  my  statement  was  that 
I  kept  that  in  order  to  get  a  sufficient  number  to  make  one 
trip  to  the  City  Treasurer,  by  Avhich  means  to  save  entries  at 
the  City  Treasury  and  to  myself  trouble. 

Q.  But  during  that  time  you  made  returns  to  the  City 
Treasurer  ? 

A.  A  number  of  returns  were  made. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  give  this  Committee — any 
reason  why  you  failed  to  pay  that  $100,  received  from  Mr. 
Linse,  in  check,  until  December  of  that  year. 

A.  Only  the  explanation  I  have  made. 

Q.  You  have  said  to  the  Committee  that  you  made  a  num- 
ber of  payments  to  the  Treasurer — that  you  kept  those  moneys 
for  convenience  until  they  accumulated, .  in  order  not  to  make 
^  number  of  errands  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  will  say  that  there  may  have  been  cases 
that  I  do  not  recollect. 

Q.  You  got  this  man's  money  on  the  9th  of  January,  and 
the  City  Treasurer  received  it  on  the  26th  of  December.  Yet 
he  said  he  had  complied  with  all  the  demands  you  had  made 
upon  him. 

A.  He  may  not  have  done  so — only  supposed  that  he  did. 


293 


Q.  He  swears  tliat  he  did. 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  he  didn't.  I  cannot  say  until  I 
make  an  examination.  I  have  no  recollection  what  the  case 
was,  but  evidently  there  was  a  cause  for  that  delay. 

Q.  You  said  you  would  refuse  these  policies  unless  they 
were  made  payable  to  William  B.  Smith,  Trustee  ? 

A.  Xo,  sir.  I  said  unless  the  clause  was  inserted  in  the 
body  of  the  policy — "  Loss,  if  any,  payable  to  the  City  of 
Philadelphia" — I  would  decline  them. 

Q.  Did  you  see  this  clause  in  the  ordinance  of  1856 — "And 
every  pawnbroker  so  applying  for  a  license  shall  first  effect  an 
insurance  against  fire  on  goods  pawned,  for  $5,000,  the  policy 
for  which  shall  be  deposited  with  his  bond  before  said  license 
is  given  to  him ' '  ? 

A.  I  read  it. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  there  about  any  such  demand  ? 

A.  There  is  a  requirement  about  ?5',000  insurance.  But  a 
deposit  of  a  policy  of  insurance  without  that  clause  is  worth- 
less ;  it  is  nothing  more  or  less  than  a  piece  of  blank  paper. 
It  is  no  security.  The  law  intended  that  the  deposit  should 
be  of  some  value — that  the  deposit  of  the  policy  should  be  of 
some  value — and  without  that  clause  it  is  of  no  value.  That 
makes  it  valuable,  and  makes  it  a  deposit  which  the  law  meant 
when  it  was  passed. 

Q.  Let  us  read  the  law  again,  and  then  we  can  see  whether 
you  are  right.  The  law  is  as  I  have  already  read  it,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"And  every  pawnbroker  so  applying  for  a  license  shall  first 
effect  an  insurance  against  fire  on  goods  pawned,  for  $5,000, 
the  policy  for  which  shall  be  deposited  with  his  bond  before 
said  license  is  given  to  him." 

That  is,  the  paAvnbroker  is  to  effect  the  insurance,  and  then 
the  policy  is  to  be  deposited  with  his  bond.  Do  you  find  any 
authority  there,  or  any  wheres  there,  which  say  that  it  shall 
be  in  any  other  name  than  that  of  the  pawnbroker  ? 


294 


A.  I  don't  know  that  I  can  make  a  fuller  explanation  than 
I  have.  Is  a  policy  of  value — a  policy  made  for  protection 
— unless  it  is  placed  in  that  shape,  unless  it  has  that  clause  in 
it?    Is  it  of  any  value  at  all? 

Q.  Yes ;  for  this  reason,  that  the  man  who  makes  the  insur- 
ance cannot  obtain  the  money  for  the  insurance  so  effected  un- 
less he  produces  the  policy  or  the  receipt. 

Mr.  Earle  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor) : 
You  are  mistaken  about  that. 

Mr.  Clay  : 

Well,  if  I  am  mistaken,  I  am  glad  to  be  informed  of  it.  It 
is  a  good  thing  to  know.  I  am  glad  to  know  it  and  this  Com- 
mittee are  glad  to  know  it. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Very  well,  then,  we  will  give  you  the  benefit  of  the 
doubt.  Now,  we  have  .  the  testimony  of  a  man  named  Mc- 
Oarry,  in  which  he  says  that  he  paid  you  for  his  license  for 
the  year  '85  by  check,  dated  on  the  ^  d  of  January  of  that 
year,  and  also  left  with  you  his  bond  on  that  date,  but  did  not 
get  his  license  until  December,  '85  ;  and  he  says,  moreover, 
that  for  the  present  year  he  gave  you  a  check  on  the  6th  of 
January,  and  left  with  you  an  executed  bond,  and  proffered  to 
you  an  insurance  policy  in  his  own  name,  which  you  refused 
to  accept. 

A.  In  January? 

Q.  Yes. 

A.  He  did  not. 

Q.  Of  this  year  ? 
A.  It  is  not  true. 

Q.  His  check  is  dated  the  6th  of  January  ? 
A.  It  is  not  true.    He  presented  to  me  no  policy  of  insur- 
ance until  since  the  22d  of  August,  when  he  presented  a 


295 


policy  which  had  not  that  clause  in  it,  and  I  declined  to  re- 
ceive it  unless  it  was  inserted. 

Q.  I  will  read  from  his  testimony  : 

"  Q.  How  is  it  you  have  no  license  for  this  year  ?  A.  I 
wdll  explain  it.  The  Mayor  has  not  got  my  policy  of  insur- 
ance on  deposit.  The  Mayor's  clerk  positively  refused  to 
receive  it  unless  it  was  assigned  to  William  B.  Smith.  I  de- 
clined to  make  the  assignment,  as  such  was  not  the  custom, 
and  that  the  law  was,  that  we  were  to  deposit  them  with  the 
Mayor,  but  not  to  assign  them." 

A.  I  never  asked  him  to  make  an  assignment  of  the  policy. 
It  was  simply  about  that  clause  to  be  inserted. 

Q.  Did  you  report  that  case  to  the  Mayor 

A.  I  don't  know  that  I  did.  I  don't  think  I  did.  The  de- 
tails of  the  whole  matter  were  expected  by  the  Mayor  to  be 
executed  by  me.  He  depended  upon  me,  and  I  don't  think  I 
violated  his  orders. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  was  right,  under  such  circumstances,  to 
allow  or  permit  him  to  carry  on  his  business  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  he  ought  to  be  closed  to-day  for  vio- 
lation of  the  law — not  complying  with  it.  That  is  my  personal 
idea  of  it.  I  will  say  that  there  are  two  or  three  points  in  his 
evidence,  which,  if  I  read  correctly  what  was  in  the  newspapers, 
I  can  contradict  with  impunity. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mr.  Samuel  Nathans,  the  pawnbroker  ? 
A.  I  do,  very  well. 

Q.  He  says  that  he  paid  you  JiOO  on  December  31,  1884, 
at  which  time  when  he  paid  the  money,  he  complied  with  the 
conditions  of  the  law  with  regard  to  the  insurance  and  bond. 
Was  there  any  reason  why  his  money  was  not  paid  into  the 
City  Treasury  until  the  thirty-first  of  December  ? 

A.  None,  except  what  I  have  already  designated.  He  paid 
me  $30  also  to  have  his  policy  renewed,  and  it  was  renewed. 


296 


Q.  Why  didn't  you  pay  that  money  into  the  Treasury  V 
A.  For  the  same  reason  that  I  have  given  you  before.  I 
cannot  tell  you  why.  The  delay  was  my  own  fault  and  nobody 
elses  but  my  own.  There  was  no  intention  of  concealing  or 
delaying  the  matter  for  any  purpose,  except  as  a  matter  of  con- 
venience to  myself  and  the  City  Treasurer — to  save  a  number 
of  entries ;  and  not  only  entries,  but  to  save  the  messenger 
running  up  there. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mr.  Mekeal,  the  pawnbroker  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  He  testified  that  he  paid  you  for  his  license  in  the  early 
part  of  the  year  1885,  and  at  the  same  time  gave  you  a  policy 
of  insurance  which  you  accepted  and  executed  his  bond.  That 
was  on  the  sixth  of  Januar}^  Why  didn't  he  get  his  license 
until  the  end  of  the  year  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you.  I  don't  know  why  the  delay  was 
made. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  by  this  time  enough  money  had 
accumulated  from  what  the  pawnbrokers  had  paid  in  to  justify 
you  in  making  a  return  to  the  City  Treasurer. 

A.  I  presume  the  delay  was  my  own  fault.  I  can't  con- 
ceive why  it  was,  but  there  may  have  been  a  cause  for  it  All 
I  know  is  what  I  have  already  designated. 

Q.  Now,  in  the  year  1886,  a  number  of  these  pawnbrokers, 
Solomon  Linse,  Mr.  Nathans,  and  others,  testified  that  they 
executed  their  bonds  aed  delivered  to  you  their  policies  of  in- 
surance in  the  manner  in  which  you  had  been  instructed  to 
take  them,  and  that  they  paid  their  fees,  and  yet  did  not  re- 
ceive their  licenses  until  a  few  weeks  ago.    Why  was  that  ? 

A.  I  will  answer  that  case  generally,  and  it  will  cover  a 
great  many  of  these  cases  probably.  These  pawnbrokers  sup- 
posed that  by  having  a  policy  on  deposit,  which,  as  I  have 
stated,  was  not  in  existence,  and  not  a  renewal  receipt — no 
deposit  of  a  renewal  receipt,  that  they  were  all  right  with  re- 
gard to  their  policies  of  insurance.    I  knew  they  were  not,. 


and  insisted  upon  having  their  receipts  deposited,  keeping  tlieir 
policies  alive.  That  is  the  case  with  the  most  of  them  ;  they 
had  an  idea  that  by  simply  depositing  a  policy  that  had  run 
out,  they  holding  the  receipts  for  the  renewals,  that  they  had 
accomplished  all  that  the  law  required  them  to  do.  It  was  not 
the  case.  I  needed  or  wanted  the  receipts  for  the  renewals  to 
attach  to  the  policies. 

Q.  Did  you  notify  them  to  that  effect  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  they  refuse  or  neglect  to  comply  ? 

A.  They  refused  in  some  cases  and  neglected  in  others. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  then  ? 

A.  Time  and  again  I  wrote  to  them. 

Q.  Did  you  report  to  the  Mayor? 

A.  I  told  him  that  a  number  were  behind. 

Q.  Was  any  effort  made  to  stop  them  from  doing  business  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  Since  the  22d  of  August,  last 
month,  a  very  large  number  of  these  policies  have  been  placed 
in  proper  shfxpe  by  the  return  of  the  receipts,  and  in  some  in- 
stances with  the  policies  themselves.  Yet  there  are  some  de- 
linquencies. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  delinquencies  ? 

A.  Parties  who  have  not  complied  with  the  law.  Some  of 
the  bonds  have  not  been  fully  executed. 

Q.  Then  why  did  you  let  these  people  go  on  ? 
A.  Well,  I  wrote  them  notes  and  I  believe  I  fulfilled  my 
duty  by  urging  them, 

Q.  So  far  as  you  know  then  no  efforts  were  made  by  the 
police  department  to  prohibit  these  people  from  doing  business  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  of  any. 

Q.  Although  from  time  to  time  you  made  report  to  your 
superior  officer,  the  Mayor. 

A.  My  reports  to  him  were  seldom  made,  I  would  speak 
to  him  in  an  indefinite  manner  about  it,  hoping  that  these 
38 


298 


people  would  come  up  and  comply  with  the  law  without  any- 
trouble.  In  other  words  we  have  been  lenient  with  these 
people  when  probably  we  ought  to  have  been  more  strict. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  moneys  you  received 
from  coal  oil  licenses  you  turned  into  the  City  Treasury  the 
day  you  received  them  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  ? 

A.  There  was  a  difference  which  arose  in  reference  to  the 
opinion  of  the  City  Solicitor,  and  no  licenses  were  issued  for 
those  that  had  been  received.;  no  licenses  were  issued  in  the 
coal  oil  matter. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  money  received  from  amuse- 
ment licenses  ? 

A.  Paid  it  into  the  Treasury. 
Q.  When  would  you  do  that  ? 

A.  I  would  send  it  up  with  the  batch,  as  I  have  already 
told  you  ;  it  was  just  done  in  the  same  way. 

Q.  With  the  money  from  the  theatrical  licenses  what  did 
you  do  ? 

A.  Just  the  same. 

Q.  How  would  you  send  the  money  up  ? 
A.  In  cash,  nsually. 
Q.  In  cash  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  retain  the  cash  in  your  own  possession  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  authority  did  you  have  for  doing  that  ? 

A.  The  idea  was  to  turn  it  into  the  treasury,  which  was 
done,  upon  the  making  out  of  the  licenses  and  getting  his  sig- 
nature to  the  licenses  ;  it  was  never  used  in  any  way  by  any 
.body — neither  by  the  Mayor,  myself,  nor  anybody  else. 


299 


Q.  You  know  of  no  authority  or  law  to  permit  you  to  keep 
it  in  that  way  ? 

A.  There  was  no  intention  to  use  it  and  it  never  was  used. 
I  didn't  want  it  for  any  purpose  for  myself,  and  the  Mayor 
had  no  control  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  knowledge  of  a  city  ordinance  which  requires 
all  city  moneys  to  be  paid  into  the  treasury  on  the  day  of  their 
receipt  ? 

A.  Since  this  investigation — yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  was  the  first  you  knew  about  it  ? 

A.  The  first  I  knew  of  the  law. 

Q.  You  went  into  office  in  1884,  I  believe  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  said  that  you  made  efforts  to  make  yourself 
acquainted  with  the  law  regulating  the  department  in  which 
your  services  are  performed  ? 

A.  In  what  respect  ? 

Q.  Respecting  the  receipt  of  the  city  moneys  from  various 
sources  and  the  turning  over  of  them  to  the  City  Treasury. 
You  said  that  you  went  into  the  matter  about  the  pawnbrokers. 
Did  not  you  make  the  same  efforts  to  get  a  knowledge  of  all 
the  ordinances  ? 

A.  I  presume  I  did. 

Q.  You  say  it  was  only  recently  you  had  the  first  intima- 
tion of  the  existence  of  that  ordinance  about  turning  over  the 
moneys  at  once  to  the  City  Treasurer? 

A.  The  first  knowledge  that  I  had  was  since  the  22d  day 
of  August. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  that  you  made  deposits  for  his  Honor,  the 
Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  told  us  that  you  would  collect  the  pawnbroker's 
licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


300 


Q.  Would  you  mix  up  that  monej  with  the  money  received 
from  theatrical  licenses  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  AVould  you  keep  it  separate? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  You  know  that  these  amounts  were  small  but 
the  other  w^as  a  large  amount. 

Q.  You  did  not  mix  it  with  the  money  from  the  gunpowder 
licenses  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  So,  as  far  as  you  were  concerned  the  fees  from  the  pawn- 
brokers'4icenses  were  kept  as  a  distinct  and  separate  fund? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  that  money  after  it  came  into 
your  possession  ? 

A.  Almost  daily  I  would  make  up  the  account.  If  there 
were  any  checks  that  required  endorsement  for  deposit  I  would 
take  them  to  the  Mayor,  and  in  many  instances  1  simply  told 
him  what  it  was,  and  in  many  instances  the  Mayor  would  just 
say  "fix  up  the  ticket."  He  would  tell  me  to  do  it,  and  I 
would  do  it  faithfully. 

Q.  You  w^ould  make  up  the  deposit? 

A.  I  would,  generally. 

Q.  After  the  slip  was  made  up,  what  would  you  do  then  ? 

A'.  Either  send  it  to  the  bank  or  take  it  myself. 

Q.  To  what  bank  ? 

A.  The  Fidelity  Trust  Company. 

Q.  How  would  you  make  up  the  deposit  slips  ? 
A.  W"m.  B.  Smith,  treasurer. 

Q.  You  are  confident,  are  you,  that  all  the  money  received 
for  pawnbrokers'  licenses  in  the  years  '85  and  '86  was  deposited 
to  the  credit  of  Wm.  B.  Smith,  treasurer,  in  the  Fidelity 
Trust  Company  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


301 


•Q.  There  is  no  mistake  about  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  every  dollar  received  was  so  deposited. 

Q.  It  went  into  the  Fidelity  Company  deposit  to  the  credit 
of  Wm.  B.  Smith,  treasurer  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  have  that  knowledge  because  you  either  took 
the  money  yourself  or  dispatched  a  messenger  for  that  pur- 
pose ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  the  Mayor  would  endorse  all  the  checks  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir — deposited  to  the  credit  of  Wm.  B.  Smith, 
treasurer. 

Q.  Did  he  never  look  on  the  face  of  any  of  the  checks  ? 

A.  He  did  sometimes,  but  in  some  cases  he  did  not.  In 
those  cases  I  would  just  turn  them  down  for  his  endorsement, 
and  would  tell  him  that  they  were  for  pawnbrokers'  licenses. 
He  often  did  not  see  the  face  of  the  checks. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Now  the  most  serious  charge  made  against  his  Honor 
the  Mayor  is  in  connection  with  these  pawnbrokers'  licenses. 
I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  assumed  the  entire  respon- 
sibility of  any  irregularity  in  connection  with  those  licenses  ? 

A.  If  there  is  any  blame  or  any  irregularity,  I  feel  that  I 
am  responsible  for  it.  It  was  not  done  intentionally  for  any 
delay  in  any  manner. 

Q.  You  say,  if  there  is  any  blame  for  it.    Do  you  think 
there  is  not  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  there  is  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  mean  so  far  as  conducting  the  business. 
My  passing  over  the  money  ended  that  for  me. 


302 


Q.  You  think  that  your  entire  course  in  connection  with 
these  licenses  for  pawnbrokers  was  entirely  regular  and  ac- 
cording to  law  ? 

A.  There  may  have  been  some  errors  in  judgment  in  the 
matter,  but  only  that.  I  believe  conscientiously  that  the 
duties  Avere  performed  by  me  in  the  proper  manner. 

Q.  So  that  nothing  has  been  done  wrong  ? 

A.  There  was  no  intention  of  it. 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  you  about  the  intention.    Has  there 
been  anything  done  wrong  by  you  ? 
A.  Not  by  me. 

Q.  Has  there  been  anything  wrong  done  by  anybody  else  ? 
A.  Not  that  I  know  of ;  I  have  no  control  over  the  acts  of 
other  people. 

Q.  Did  anybody  ia  your  Department  have  anything  at  all 
do,  with  these  licenses,  except  you  and  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Nobody  but  myself. 
Q.  And  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  The  Mayor  received  the  money. 
Q.  And  signed  the  licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So,  no  one  but  yourself  and  the  Mayor  had  anything  to 
do  with  this  matter  ? 
A.  Nobody. 

Q.  And  you  say  that  nothing  was  done  contrary  to  law  ? 

A.  Well,  I  am  not  the  Mayor,  and  I  don't  intend  te  judge 
of  the  law  for  him,  but  all  that  was  done  was  conscientiously 
done,  and  I  believed  at  the  time  of  doing  it,  it  was  properly 
done. 

Q.  Now,  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  very  care- 
fully studied  up  the  law  in  connection  with  pawnbrokers  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  And  carefully  studied  it  in  order  that  you  might  act  in- 
telligently and  according  to  law  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


303 


Q.  And  you  say  you  acted  according  to  law  because  you 
made  it  a  study  to  acquaint  yourself  with  the  law  ? 
A.  I  made  every  eifort  to  do  so. 

Q.  Did  you  read  this  part  of  the  law — "No  person  shall 
use,  exercise  or  carry  on  the  trade  or  business  of  a  pawnbroker 
within  the  city  without  having  first  obtained  such  license  as 
aforesaid,  or  after  the  revocation  thereof  under  the  penalty  of 
$1,000,  for  each  and  every  offense?" 

A.  I  made  every  effort  in  examining  the  laAV  to  know  fully 
and  practically  the  workings  under  it.  That  was  my  object 
and  intention  in  order  that  I  might  fulfill  my  duties  properly. 

Q.  Well,  you  have  just  heard  what  I  read  to  you  from  the 
ordinance  of  January  19,  '56.  About  how  many  pawnbrokers 
have  been  doing  business  this  year  in  violation  of  that  law  ? 

A.  Up  to  August  22d,  I  should  think  two-thirds  of  them, 
but  in  answering  that  question  I  desire  to  add  that  in  looking 
over  the  mode  of  conducting  the  business  heretofore  under 
Mayor  Alexander  Henry  and  in  the  terms  of  Mayor  Stokley 
and  Mayor  King,  I  find  that  the  identical  same  course  wa& 
pursued  by  them.  I  have  seen  Isaac  Nathans'  license  issued 
under  Mayor  King  when  he  had  paid  his  money  in  January 
of  the  year  mentioned  in  the  license — when  it  was  not  issued 
until  the  September  following.  I  have  seen  it.  He  showed 
it  to  me  himself. 

Q.  That  was  contrary  to  law  ? 

A.  That  was  contrary  to  law  according  to  this  ordinance, 
undoubtedly.  But  the  excuse  is,  if  it  be  needed,  that  this  was 
done  in  following  predecessors — previous  administrations — in 
the  administration  of  this  law. 

Q.  Is  that  an  excuse  ? 
A.  I  don't  think  it  is. 

Q.  Is  it  any  excuse  for  violating  the  law  when  you  do  not 
know  the  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  they  say  it  is  not.  That  is  the  decision  of  the 
court. 


304 


Q.  So  in  point  of  fact  with  reference  to  paying  this  money 
over  on  the  day  of  its  receipt  you  violated  the  law.  You  say 
that  you  did  not  think  that  such  was  the  law  until  a  few  weeks 
ago.    That  is  no  excuse  for  your  violating  the  law,  is  it  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  it  is,  but  I  think  there  is  good  and  suffi- 
-cient  excuse  for  doing  it. 

Q.  And  those  excuses  you  have  given  to  the  Committee  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  how  many  of  these  pawnbrokers  complied  with 
the  law  in  the  month  of  January  of  this  year,  and  what  are 
their  names  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  you  that  information. 

Q.  I  do  not  mean  from  memory,  but  from  your  office  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  make  a  note  of  that  inquiry,  and  furnish  the 
information  to  this  Committee — the  names  of  those  who  have 
complied  with  the  law?    How  many  about  were  there? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  the  question  from  memory. 

Q.  Cannot  you  answer  near  the  number? 

A.  I  would  rather  not ;  I  would  rather  give  you  the  facts. 

Q.  Why  did  you  treat  this  money  in  any  different  way  from 
the  money  that  came  from  other  sources  ? 

A.  The  money  from  the  pawnbrokers  being  so  large,  I  did 
not  desire  to  keep  it  in  the  office.  I  suggested  to  the  Mayor 
that  it  would  be  better  to  place  it  in  bank ;  but  the  others 
were  small  amounts — the  whole  total  of  the  others  was  proba- 
bly $800  or  $900,  or  in  that  neighborhood.  When  it  came 
to  $7,000  or  $8,000,  I  did  not  think  it  proper  or  safe  to  keep 
it,  but  suggested  myself  to  the  Mayor  to  place  it  in  better 
keeping. 

Q.  And  he  adopted  your  suggestion  ? 
A.  He  did. 


305 


Q.  Now,  about  these  pawnbrokers  who  had  not  taken  out 
their  licenses  according  to  law ;  I  understood  you  to  say  that 
you  had  notified  the. Mayor  from  time  to  time  of  that  fact  ? 

A.  "Well,  I  cannot  call  it  an  official  notification  ;  I  may 
have  been  in  conversation  with  him  in  the  office,  or  out  of  the 
office,  and  have  referred  to  it  in  conversation  merely  ;  but  my 
effort  was  to  get  these  people  to  comply  without  trouble  ;  with- 
out causing  them  or  us  trouble. 

Q.  Why? 

A.  I  don't  know  w^hy,  unless  it  was  from  the  goodness  of 
my  own  heart  to  oblige  them. 

Q.  To  oblige  these  people  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  in  order  that  they  might  comply  and  save 
trouble  for  themselves,  as  well  as  the  Department. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  after  making  a  careful  study 
of  this  law,  you  felt  it  was  necessary  first  to  have  these  people 
sign  a  bond  and  furnish  a  bondsman,  and  next  te  furnish  a 
policy  of  insurance  ? 

A.  That  is  the  reading  of  the  law. 

Q.  And  those  two  things  having  been  complied  with,  then 
you  would  say  "  the  $100,  if  you  please  ;"  that  was  the  course 
you  felt  it  w^as  proper  to  pursue  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  took  their  money  without  either. 

Q.  What  advantage  was  that  to  you  ? 
A.  None  to  me. 

Q.  Not  a  particle  ? 
A.  Not  a  particle. 

Q.  Why  did  you  take  it  ? 

A.  It  was  taken  on  their  giving  their  promise  that  they 
would  come  forward  and  execute  the  bond  and  fill  the  policy. 

Q.  Why  did  you  take  the  money  ?    Because  they  would 
have  to  come  back  again,  would  not  they  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
39 


306 


Q.  With  the  policy  of  insurance  and  bond.  What  advan- 
tage was  it  to  them  to  take  their  money  ? 

A.  Joseph  Marcer,  who  was  in  the  office  under  Mayor 
King,  and  who  attended  to  the  business  exclusively,  I  believe, 
informed  me  that  that  was  the  manner  or  mode  he  had  always 
pursued.  I  took  the  money  without  thinking  of  it  a  moment. 
Had  I  more  carefully  studied  the  law  I  think  now  I  should 
have  declined  the  money — I  know  I  would. 

Q.  You  started  out  with  a  statement  this  morning  which 
was  very  plain,  and  very  careful  and  very  concise  I  thought, 
and  you  said  that  when  you  entered  the  office  you  made  a 
careful  study  of  the  pawnbrokers'  license  business. 

A.  Not  until  September. 

Q.  But,  now  you  say  that  you  ignored  this  arrangement, 
which  you  told  Mr.  Clay  about,  entirely,  and  took  the  advice 
of  Mr.  Marcer  ? 

A.  I  did  not  take  his  advice ;  I  simply  consulted  with  him, 
and  I  found  that  he  had  been  doing  it  in  that  way  ;  that  he 
had  always  received  the  money  or  received  anything ;  the 
bond  and  the  money  afterwards,  or  the  policy  of  insurance,  or 
the  bond  and  the  money  and  the  policy — anything ;  some- 
times altogether. 

Q.  In  other  words,  anyway? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  After  you  consulted  with  him  you  adopted  his  policy  ? 
A.  Just  as  I  think  Mr.  Bardsley  would  have  done  if  he  had 
been  in  the  place. 

Q.  But  I  was  not  the  secretary  to  his  Honor,  the  Mayor? 
A.  I  know  that.    But  if  in  my  place. 

Q.  I  am  only  asking  you  these  questions  to  arrive  at  an  un- 
derstanding of  facts  of  the  case.  You  said  you  did  not  take 
his  advice.  Now  you  say  that  you  followed  what  he  told  you 
had  been  his  custom  ? 

A.  The  custom  of  all  previous  administrations  since  Mr. 
Henry. 


307 


Q.  You  told  his  advice  and  followed  the  custom  of  the  office 
theretofore  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Knowing  that  it  vras  important  to  have  licenses  in  the 
hands  of  the  pawnbrokers  because  that  was  their  warrant  for 
doing  business,  as  without  the  license  they  would  have  no  right 
to  open  their  doors  at  all,  w^ould  they  ? 

A.  Strictly  speaking,  I  think  not. 

Q.  I  mean  in  accordance  with  law.  We  are  trying  to  speak 
strictly  now.  Under  the  law  had  they  a  right  to  open  their 
doors  without  they  had  licenses  ? 

A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Well,  some  of  the  pawnbrokers  sometimes  get  into  trouble 
They  buy  or  receive  on  storage  stolen  goods.  I  presume  that 
this  law  was  passed  for  the  purpose  of  holding  them  in  subjec- 
tion, so  that  they  should  have  to  have  licenses  for  doing  busi- 
ness ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Recognizing  that  fact  during  1885,  you  allowed  them  to 
carry  on  their  business — the  majority  of  them — through  the 
entire  year  without  licenses  ? 

A.  As  has  been  done  by  all  previous  administrations. 

Q.  It  is  not  worth  while  to  re-hash  that,  because  you  have 
already  frankly  said  that  it  does  not  justify  you  if  somebody  else 
violates  the  law.  So  I  would  not  refer  to  that  again.  It  only 
puts  both  them  and  you  in  a  bad  position.  Now,  Mr.  Rosen- 
thal says  that  he  paid  you  $100,  and  deposited  with  you  his 
bond  and  his  insurance  policy.  Have  you  any  recollection  of 
the  case  at  all  ? 

A.  He  says  that  he  paid  me  ?  No,  sir,  and  I  have  no  mem- 
orandum, no  recollection,  no  knowledge  of  his  having  paid  me. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  deposit  with  you  of  his 
bond  and  insurance  policy.    Have  you  them  on  record  ? 
A.  I  think  they  are  on  hand. 


308 


Q.  Are  you  sure  they  are  ? 
A.  No  ;  I  will  find  out. 

Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  of  any  of  these  pawnbrokers 
coming  to  you  and  applying  for  a  license,  and  leaving  with 
you  only  their  bond  and  policy  of  insurance,  or  either  of  them 
without  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  were  they  ? 

A.  I  cannot  recollect  now,  but  it  has  been  done  frequently. 
Q.  Without  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  it  has  been  both  before  and  after ;  the  bond 
was  executed  sometimes  before  and  sometimes  afterwards. 

Q.  Without  the  money  ?    Were  there  many  of  them  who 
failed  to  give  you  the  money  when  they  first  came  to  the  ofiice  ? 
A.  Quite  a  number. 

Q.  How  many  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  80. 
A.  Positively  I  cannot  recollect. 

Q.  Half  of  them? 

A.  No ;  less  than  that  probably ;  I  cannot  say  that  two- 
thirds  of  them  paid  me  the  money. 

Q.  Then,  about  one-third  of  them  failed  to  give  you  the 
money  ? 

A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Q.  They  gave  you  either  their  bonds  or  their  policies  of  in- 
surance or  both  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  say  about  one-third  failed  to  give  you  the 
money  ? 

A.  They  did  it  afterwards — paid  afterwards. 

Q.  Have  those  who  failed  to  pay  you  the  money,  or  who 
gave  you  the  policy  of  insurance  and  the  bond — have  they  all 
received  their  licenses  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  they  are  not  all  issued. 


309 

Q.  Why? 

A.  Well,  since  the  22d  of  August  I  have  been  so  busy  that 
I  have  been  unable  to  make  them  out. 

Q.  Since  the  22d  of  August  last  you  say  you  have  been 
busy? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  been  so  much  engaged  that  I  have 
been  unable  to  make  them  out  :  but  I  hope  that  after  to-day — 
inside  of  forty-eight  hours — I  will  have  them  all  supplied  with 
licenses. 

Q.  You  have  been  so  pressed,  I  suppose  ? 
A.  I  have  been  so  pressed  with  business  that  I  could  not 
make  them  out. 

Q.  Now,  the  money  paid  to  the  City  Treasurer  for  these 
licenses  was  about  $8,000  in  total,  which  represents  eighty 
pawnbrokers'  licenses  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  about  one-third  of  that  number,  perhaps,  as  you 
have  testified,  gave  you  the  money  when  they  first  called  upon 
you? 

A.  I  don't  want  to  say  one-third.  I  am  not  sure.  There 
were  a  number  who  did  not. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  names  of  those  porsons  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that  I  can.    If  I  possibly  can  I  will. 

Q.  Have  you  any  record  of  them  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  names  of  two  or  three  who  failed  to 
^ive  you  the  money  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  whether  I  can  without  going  to  the  office. 
I  possibly  may  get  the  information,  but  I  am  not  sure. 

Q.  Can  you  remember  the  name  of  one? 
A.  I  cannot. 

Q.  Now,  in  January  of  this  year  you  collected  $5,400  for 
pawnbrokers  licenses.    That  represents  fifty-four  licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


310 


Q.  You  stated  that  the  reason  why  you  did  not  pay  the 
money  over  to  the  City  Treasurer  was  to  save  the  time  of  your 
messengers  and  of  the  clerks  in  the  Treasurer's  office. 

A.  And  to  wait  until  they  had  fully  executed  their  bonds 
and  policies  of  insurance — in  many  cases. 

Q.  That  was  the  reason  ? 

A.  That  was  the  reason. 

Q.  All  those  three  reasons. 

A.  Yes.  There  were  some  few  who,  in  the  early  part  of 
this  year — in  the  early  part  of  January — Isaac  Nathans,  and 
some  few  others — who  did  comply  with  the  law.  That  money 
was  not  sent  to  the  City  Treasurer  but  the  whole  of  it  was 
deposited  in  bank  to  the  credit  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer. 
That  was  kept  back  for  the  purpose  of  getting  a  batch  of  them 
to  send  up  at  the  same  time.  The  same  course  was  pursued  in 
previous  years. 

Q.  Never  mind  about  previous  years.  They  must  have 
been  doing  very  wrong  things  in  the  previous  years,  too. 
Some  of  those  people,  who  paid  their  money  in  January,  sat- 
isfied the  law  in  every  particular  ? 

A.  They  did  ;  among  them  was  Isaac  Nathans. 

Q.  The  testimony  of  the  witnesses  here  before  us  you  have 
read,  I  presume  ? 

A.  Only  in  the  newspapers  ;  I  have  not  had  a  copy. 

Q.  I  hope  you  will  be  furnished  with  a  copy,  because  these 
pawnbrokers,  with  one  exception,  testified  that  in  the  month 
of  January — those  who  paid  in  that  month — testified  that  they 
fully  complied  with  the  law. 

A.  Mr.  McGarry  swore  to  that  fact,  but  it  is  not  true. 

Q.  That  is  what  we  want  to  get  at.  How  many  more 
swore  falsely  ?    It  is  to  your  credit  to  find  out. 

A.  I  noticed  his  testimony,  particularly. 

Q.  The  office  of  the  Mayor  had  full  power  to  make  these 
people  comply  with  the  law  ? 
A.  I  think  so,  under  the  law. 


311 


Q.  Some  of  them  say  that  they  hold  changed  checks,  prin- 
cipally as  a  threat  against  the  Mayor's  Office  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia. 

A.  I  noticed  that. 

Q.  These  people,  according  to  your  statement  made  to-day, 
must  be  in  default  ? 

A.  They  are.  Mr.  McGarry  is  a  defaulter  to-day  in  the 
office.    He  has  not  complied  with  the  law. 

Q.  He  is  one  of  those  who  holds  a  changed  check  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Of  course  the  Mayor  is  fully  advised  of  that  fact  now  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  You  stated  in  your  testimony,  in  answer  to  Mr.  Clay, 
that  from  time  to  time  you  full}^  advised  the  Mayor  of  these 
violations  of  the  law,  but  not  officially  ? 

A.  Simply  in  conversation  with  him  I  have  mentioned  it, 
but  I  don't  know  that  ever  officially  I  called  the  attention  of 
the  Mayor  to  the  fact  of  their  having  violated  the  law.  I  did 
not  do  this,  in  order  to  save  trouble,  and  induce  them  to  comply 
with  the  law.    Note  after  note  was  written  to  them. 

Q.  You  have  copies  of  all  your  correspondence,  I  presume  ? 

A.  Not  all. 

Q.  Have  you  nowhere  in  the  office  copies  of  those  letters  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  not  take  copies  of  those  letters  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  I  did,  but  I  will  look  to  see. 

Q.  At  this  moment  you  have  no  recollection  of  taking  copies 
of  these  letters  to  the  defaulting  pawnbrokers  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  that  they  were  copied.  The  matter 
was  of  so  little  consequence  at  the  time  I  wrote  the  letters  I 
did  not  suppose  it  was  necessary. 

Q.  How  do  you  mean  that  it  was  of  so  little  importance 
after  you  had  made  such  a  careful  study  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  supposed  they  were  coming  up  to  attend  to  the  matter 
promptly,  which  they  did  not  do. 


312 


Q.  Some  of  them  did  ? 

A.  And  some  of  them  did  not. 

Q.  You  stated  a  few  moments  ago  that  you  had  sent  to 
these  people  time  and  time  again,  and  that  you  had  informed 
the  Mayor  of  their  default,  and  you  say  that  you  think  you  have 
done  your  duty  in  the  matter.  So  no  responsibility  rests  on 
you.    This  is  what  I  understand  to  be  your  position  now  ? 

A.  I  don't  say  that. 

Q.  You  stated,  "  I  think  I  have  done  my  duty  in  this 
matter  "  ? 
A.  Tes,  sir. 

Q.  That  w^as  in  reference  to  your  reporting  to  the  Mayor 
these  violations  of  the  law.  Is  that  it?  Now,  these  other 
moneys  from  theatrical  and  gunpowder  licenses  and  fines  im- 
posed, do  you  collect  those  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  The  fines  imposed  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    I  do  not.    I  had  nothing  to  do  with  them. 
Q.  You  only  collected  on  the  pawnbrokers  and  for  the  the- 
atrical and  gunpowder  licenses  ? 
A.  And  coal  oil  licenses. 

Q.  The  theatrical  licenses  were  collected  in  January  and  in 
February,  and  were  paid  over  after  this  inquiry,  or  v/as  it 
before  the  time  this  inquiry  was  started  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  prior. 

Q.  It  was  on  the  20th  of  August. 
A.  Very  well. 

Q.  They  were  received  in  January  and  were  paid  in  August. 

A.  Some  were,  and  some  were  received  in  August.  A 
number  of  the  theatrical  places  have  not  yet  paid.  Some- 
times they  do  not  pay  until  the  last  of  the  year. 

Q.  You  have  not  returned  any  money  received  from  that 
source  in  August  ? 

A.  I  received  $150  and  paid  it  to  the  City  Treasurer. 


313 


Q.  Since  August  27th,  then  ? 
A.  Yes,  sh\ 

Q.  The  amounts  received  in  January  and  in  February  were 
§100  in  each  month. 
A.  I  believe  so. 
Q.  You  paid  that  money  over  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  the  whole  of  it. 

Q.  What  did  I  understand  you  to  say  was  the  reason  why 
you  didn't  pay  it  over  early  in  the  ye^r  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  You  kept  that  money  in  bank  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  it  was  kept  in  my  fire-proof  in  my  room — the 
whole  of  it,  and  never  used. 

Q.  Was  it  there  to  be  used  for  any  purpose  at  all  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  it  was  not  to  be  used  for  any  purpose,  and  it 
was  not. 

Q.  Mr.  March  explained  that  he  used  some  of  the  moneys  ? 

A.  He  never  had  anything  to  do  with  any  of  mine ;  and  it 
was  never  used  by  myself  or  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Did  the  theatres  pay  for  their  licenses  in  cash  or  by 
check  ? 

A.  I  believe  it  was  all  paid  in  cash  ;  I  don't  know  of  a 
single  check. 

Q.  And  so  were  the  gunpowder  licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  $5. 

Q.  And  so  it  was  with  the  coal  oil  licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  you  collected  considerable  money  for  coal  oil 
licenses — several  hundred  dollars  ? 

A.  Three  or  four  hundred  dollars ;  I  have  not  got  the 
amount  in  my  memory. 

Q.  It  was  $140  for  coal  oil  licenses,  wholesale,  in  January, 
and  you  paid  it  in  August  ? 

A.  I  handed  it  to  the  Mayor,  and  he  paid  it  over. 
40 


314 


.Q.  Was  there  not  a  dispute  as  to  the  wholesale  coal  oil 
licenses  ? 

A.  None  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  Did  you  issue  the  licenses  for  those  $140  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  are  not  issued  yet. 

Q.  Why? 

A.  Well,  there  seems  to  be  a  difficulty  as  to  who  is  liable. 

Q.  About  the  wholesale  licenses  is  there  difficulty  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  some  of  them  are  complaining  and  demanding 
their  money  ;  the  City  Solicitor's  opinion  designated  that  only 
the  retailers  were  exempt,  but  some  of  the  wholesalers  claimed 
they  are  exempt  also ;  the  question  of  liability  under  the  law 
is  not  very  well  defined  ;  it  is  not  defined  at  all. 

Q.  Has  it  not  been  defined  by  the  City  Solicitor  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  In  designating  the  quantity  of  oil  that  a  re- 
tailer can  hold  it  seems  that  he  can  have  fifty  barrels  on  his 
premises. 

Q.  But  I  am  referring  only  to  the  wholesale  licenses  ? 

A.  I  am  coming  to  that.  Some  of  the  wholesale  people 
claim  that  they  are  not  in  class  one,  as  you  might  call  it.  They 
claim  that  they  don't  keep  the  quantity  that  they  pay  for  and 
that  they  are  entitled  to  be  exempt.  The  question  of  exemp- 
tion is  one  which  I  think  should  be  settled  by  the  Court  by  a 
trial  case.  A  submission  of  the  law  itself  without  any  argu- 
ment on  behalf  of  the  city  will  make  everybody  liable  who  sells 
or  keeps  oil.  I  may  be  wrong  but  I  wouldn't  be  afraid  to 
submit  the  law  without  any  argument.  I  know  there  has  been 
a  great  deal  of  difficulty  about  the  matter  and  that  is  one  of 
the  reasons — the  main  reason  why  these  licenses  for  coal  oil 
dealers  have  not  been  issued.  Then  there  is  another  point  I 
wish  to  call  your  attention  to.  It  is  with  regard  to  the  surveys 
that  were  made.  In  some  cases  they  ought  not  to  receive  a 
license  from  the  City  of  Philadelphia.  Their  places  are  not 
kept  properly — the  oil  is  not  kept  in  the  manner  the  law  desig- 
nates it  shall  be  kept.  This  has  been  the  principal  difficulty 
in  the  non-issue  of  the  licenses  to  the  coal  oil  dealers. 


315 


Q.  Why  should  you  not  be  guided  by  the  City  Solicitor's 
opinion  ? 

A.  We  have  been — entirely,  always, 

Q.  Now,  these  $140  for  wholesale  licenses  were  paid  in 
January.  Was  there  any  dispute  in  January  about  the  whole- 
sale licenses  at  all  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  in  February  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  in  March? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  in  April  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  the  dispute  first  come  to  your  knowledge  about 
the  wholesale  licenses  ? 

A.  I  don't  know ;  but  I  can  say  the  dispute  was  constant 
as  to  the  liability  from  the  commencement  of  demanding  them 
to  have  licenses.  The  complaint  was  made  daily  and  con- 
stantly by  everybody  who  called  to  the  office  to  inquire  about 
the  matter. 

Q.  Did  any  wholesale  dealer  who  paid  out  his  money  object 
to  taking  his  license? 
A.  A  number  of  them. 
Q.  Objected  to  taking  their  licenses  ? 

A.  Oh,  no,  sir.  They  were  anxious,  some  of  them,  to  get 
them.  I  don't  believe  that  the  Mayor  would  consent  to  issue 
licenses  to  some  of  them  on  account  of  the  careless  manner  in 
which  they  store  the  oil — jeopardizing  or  endangering  a  whole 
block. 

Q.  Instead  of  putting  those  moneys  in  the  bank  to  the 
credit  of  the  Mayor,  why  didn't  you  send  them  to  the  City 
Treasurer's  office  ? 

A.  It  was  on  account  of  this  dispute.  The  Mayor  had 
grave  doubts  in  his  own  mind  about  it,  and  expressed  them  to 
me,  and  spoke  about  the  propriety  of  collecting  them.  There 


316 


was  little  collected  under  Mayor  King,  and  under  Mayor 
Stokley  I  think  the  largest  amount  collected  in  any  year 
during  his  administration  was  about  $800.  It  would  run  down 
to  two  or  three  hundred  dollars.  The  Mayor  expressed  great 
doubt  as  to  the  propriety  of  collecting  it.  Indeed,  in  1885, 
he  refused,  not  feeling  clear  on  the  subject.  So  there  was 
very  little  or  none  collected  under  his  administration  in  1885. 

Q.  You  say  the  present  Mayor  didn't  collect  because  of  the 
doubt  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  Board  of  Fire  Underwriters  and  a  large 
number  of  citizens  called  upon  the  Mayor,  and  urged  him  to 
make  this  collection.  The  fact  is,  so  far  as  we  have  gone  in 
1886,  this  year,  to  reduce  the  number  of  persons  who  keep  it 
to  a  very  great  extent.  Probably  I  am  safe  in  saying  that 
one-third  of  the  people  who  kept  coal  oil  have  abolished  the 
keeping  of  it — no  longer  keep  it. 

Q.  So  that  the  reason  for  retaining  this  money  from  Janu- 
ary until  August  was  wholly  because  of  the  doubts  in  the  mind 
of  the  Mayor  as  to  his  right  to  collect  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  the  money  from  the  retail  dealers  is  in  the  same 
category  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  they  who  made  the  greatest  objections  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  they  did. 

Q.  The  money  received  from  that  source  was  held  back  for 
the  same  reason  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Because  of  the  doubts  in  the  mind  of  the  Mayor  as  to 
his  right  to  collect  it  ? 

A.  As  soon  as  there  was  a  decision  from  the  City  Solicitor 
about  it,  the  demands  from  the  retailers  were  made ;  and  when 
there  came  the  subsequent  decision  of  the  City  Solicitor, 


317 


directing  that  the  money  shouki  be  paid  into  the  City  Trea- 
sury, the  whole  of  it  was  paid  into  the  City  Treasury — both 
from  wholesale  and  retail  licenses. 

Q.  Now  you  collected  from  these  dealers  in  coal  oil  a  sum  of  • 
money  for  surveys  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  amounted  to  $5  from  retailers  and  $10  from  whole- 
salers ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  collected  it  and  paid  it  over  to  Fire  Marshall 
Wood  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    The  law  designates  that  he  shall  have  it  and 
that  it  shall  first  be  paid. 

Q.  And  you  paid  that  over  to  him,  except  so  far  as  the 
amount  you  retained  by  reason  of  the  arrangement  between. 
him  and  yourself? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  was  that  one-half  of  the  fee  should  be  kept  by  you 
for  your  trouble,  or  for  any  reason,  it  does  not  make  any  dif- 
ference what.    You  kept  that  and  paid  him  the  other  half. 

A.  That  is  true. 

Q.  Now,  you  said  that  but  twenty-six  surveys  w^ere  madcy 
and  that  he  w^as  paid  for  sixty-one  surveys.    Is  that  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  didn't  he  make  the  other  surveys  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know\  He  has  not  done  his  duty — not  per- 
formed his  duty  in  that  respect. 

Q.  Was  it  because  of  his  discharge  from  his  position  ? 

A.  Most  of  those  surveys  could  have  been  made  by  him 
prior  to  his  discharge.  In  fact,  all,  except  that  probably  you 
may  not  include  the  last  day. 

Q.  Then  he  was  negligent  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  he  was.    You  must  be  the  judge  of 
that. 


318 


Q.  Now,  fines  for  the  redemption  of  dogs  you  had  nothing 
to  do  with  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

■  By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  According  to  the  instructions  you  were  acting  under 
this  year,  if  a  pawnbroker  made  application  for  a  license,  and 
executed  a  bond  and  had  a  policy  of  insurance,  so  that  in  case 
of  fire  the  loss  would  be  made  payable  to  William  B.  Smith, 
the  Mayor,  and  paid  his  $100,  would  you  then  think  that  all 
the  requirements  of  the  law  had  been  complied  with,  and  that 
the  man  was  entitled  to  his  license  ? 

A.  If  he  was  a  man  of  good  character. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Moses  Phillip  Hamburg,  a  pawnbroker  ?  e 

A.  I  don't  recollect  him. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  there  is  a  pawnbroker  of  that 
name  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is. 

Q.  He  says  that  he  paid  you  $100  for  a  license  in  the  early 
part  of  this  year,  in  the  month  of  January,  and  that  at  the 
same  time  he  filed  a  bond  and  left  an  insurance  policy  with  the 
loss  made  payable  to  the  Mayor ;  and  he  says  that  the  two 
policies  are  there,  renewed  in  January  and  March — both  in 
Major  Linton's  safe — are  there  now  ;  and  he  says  that  he  ex- 
ecuted his  bond  early  in  the  year.  Yet  for  all  this  time  he 
has  not  received  his  license.    Why  is  that  ? 

A.  Well,  I  presume  he  is  in  the  same  category  with  the 
others. 

Q.  Now,  this  man  has  done  everything  you  said  he  should 
do — had  his  policy  made  out  as  required,  and  executed  his 
bond  and  paid  his  money,  and  yet  he  has  not  received  his 
license;  why? 

A.  I  think  I  have  fully  answered  that  question  before. 

Q.  But  he  has  done  everything  and  has  not  got  his  license? 
A.  He  may  have  done  everything;  I  don't  know  whether 


319 


he  has;  there  may  have  been  a  cause  for  the  delay  which  I 
don't  recollect ;  but  I  place  him  in  the  same  category  with  the 
others ;  there  were  some  that  did  comply  with  the  law  in  the 
early  part  of  Januury,  and  I  have  given  the  reasons  why  their 
licenses  were  not  sent  to  them. 

Q.  Now,  here  is  Jacob  Myers,  who  testifies  that  he  gave 
you  his  check  in  the  month  of  January,  and  at  the  same  time 
filed  his  bond,  and  since  then  he  has  renewed  his  insurance 
and  delivered  the  receipt  to  you  three  or  four  weeks  ago,  and 
yet  up  to  this  time  he  has  not  received  his  license  ? 

A.  I  have  not  had  the  time  to  make  out  the  licenses  of  those 
who  are  entitled  to  them ;  I  presume  that  after  to-day  I  shall 
have  the  time,  and  inside  of  forty-eight  hours  everybody  en- 
titled to  a  license  will  receive  one. 

Q.  That  is  your  intention  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  had  hoped  to  have  had  time  to  do  it  after 
the  22d  of  August,  immediately  after  the  payments  into  the 
City  Treasury  of  the  money,  but  I  have  not  had  the  time. 

Q.  But  these  men  stated  that  early  in  the  year  they  did  all 
that  was  required  of  them,  and  yet  have  not  received  their 
licenses  ? 

A.  I  have  waited  for  seven  or  eight  months  for  some  of 
them,  but  the  moment  they  comply  they  want  everything,  and 
I  have  not  had  the  time  to  accommdate  them. 

Q.  Then,  the  only  reason  you  now  give  why  they  have  not 
received  their  licenses  after  they  have  complied  with  all  the 
requirements  of  the  law,  is  that  you  have  not  had  the  time  to 
make  them  out  ? 

A.  I  have  not  had. 

By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Jacob  Rosenthal,  in  his  testimony  before  the  Committee, 
states  that  he  paid  $100  to  you,  and  that  you  gave  him  a  re- 
ceipt "  Subject  to  appraval."  Why  did  you  do  it  in  that 
manner  ? 


320 


A.  I  often  issue  receipts  for  the  payment  of  money  when 
they  require  it. 

Q.  Was  that  because  he  had  not  filed  his  bond  or  insurance 
policy  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect,  but  very  likely.  When  an  applicant 
comes  for  a  license  I  distinctly  inform  him  that  I  am  com- 
pelled to  submit  everything  to  the  Mayor  for  his  approval — 
the  bond  and  the  policy  of  insurance,  and  everything  else  con- 
nected with  the  matter. 

Q.  I  want  to  find  out  whether  that  was  one  of  the  cases 
where  the  party  had  not  complied  with  the  law  ? 

A.  It  is  very  likely. 

Mr.  White,  of  counsel  for  the  Mayor  : 

There  is  one  question  I  would  suggest.  The  witness  has 
testified  that  his  instructions  were  to  compel  all  these  people 
to  comply  with  the  law,  and  whenever  they  had  done  so  he 
would  so  report  to  Mayor  Smith.  Now,  I  think  the  question 
should  be  put  to  him,  whether,  in  any  case  in  which  he  reported 
that  any  pawnbroker  had  complied  with  the  requirements  of 
the  law,  there  was  the  slightest  delay  in  turning  that  money 
into  the  City  Treasurer. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Will  you  answer  that  question  ? 
A.  Never — when  I  made  such  a  report. 

Mr.  Clay  : 

I  move  that  the  Committee  take  a  recess  for  one  hour. 
The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay, 
It  was  agreed  to. 


321 


After  Recess. 

The  Committee  reassembled  at  2.30  p.  M.  upon  the  termi- 
nation of  the  time  given  for  recess. 

Mr.  Roberts,  (Chairman) :  The  chair  will  state  that  he  hag 
received  a  communication  which  will  be  read  by  the  clerk. 

The  Clerk  of  the  Committee,  Mr.  Eckstein,  here  read  the 
following  paper. 

Philadelphia^  September  8,  1886. 

Mr.  Charles  Roberts, 

Chairman  Investigating  Committee. 
Dear  Sir  : — Will  you  permit  me  to  correct  that  part  of 
my  testimony  given  this  morning,  wherein  I  stated  that  "Ezra 
Lukens  was  warrant  clerk,  and  that  Benj.  I.  Andrews  assisted 
in  filling  up  the  warrants."  Upon  examination  of  the  records, 
I  ascertain  that  Mr.  Lukens  is  "Assistant  Clerk,"  and  Benj. 
I.  Andrews  is  the  "Warrant  Clerk."  Both  have  been  con- 
firmed by  Councils,  and  their  names  appear  upon  the  roll 
made-up,  and  sent  to  the  Controller  as  the  "  Headquarters 
Roll." 

Very  Respectfully, 

JAMES  STEWART,  Jr., 

Chief  of  Police. 

Mr.  Clay :  I  move  that  the  paper  be  made  part  of  the 
records  by  the  Committee. 

The  question  being  taken  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay. 
It  was  agreed  to. 

John  L.  Linton  re-called. 

(Certain  checks  are  here  produced  and  shown  witness.) 
By  Mr.  Roberts,  (Chairman). 

Q.  You  notice  that  these  checks  have  been  altered  (indicating 
checks)  ? 

A.  I  do. 
41 


322 

Q.  Who  altered  them  ? 

A.  There  are  two  checks  here  dated  January  3,  1885  that 
were  made  payable  to  bearer — two  checks  both  dated  January 
3,  1885,  each  for  $100.  The  alteration  made  to  bearer  I  do 
not  recognize  as  my  writing.  I  do  not  know  who  altered  them 
unless  the  drawer  himself.  They  are  drawn,  one  by  Harvey 
&  McGarry  and  the  other  by  A.  J.  McGarry. 

Q.  Were  they  in  that  condition  when  they  came  into  your 
possession  ? 

A.  They  must  have  been,  because  they  are  endorsed  by  the 
Mayor.    I  passed  them  over  to  him. 

Q.  What  about  the  other  three  checks  (indicating  checks)  ? 

A.  They  are  dated  Jan.  6th,  1886,  each  of  which  have  been 
drawn  by  Harvey  and  McGarry  or  A.  J.  McGarry.  On  two 
I  think  I  recognize  my  handwriting — W.  B.  Smith  or  order. 

Q.  The  W.  B.  Smith  is  written  by  you  ? 
A.  Those  three  (indicating  checks)  are  in  my  handwriting  ; 
yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  how  the  other  two  were  altered  ? 

A.  I  don't  know ;  I  don't  recognize  the  simple  words  "  or 
order"  written  on  them;  I  don't  think  it  is  my  writing  ;  I 
will  say,  in  addition,  that  none  of  these  checks  were  altered 
unless  by  authority,  and  signed  by  the  drawers  of  these  checks. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence: 

Q.  You  make  the  statement,  notwithstanding  the  drawer  of 
the  checks  has  sworn  positively  that  they  were  altered  after 
they  left  his  possession,  and  without  his  knowledge  and  con- 
sent? 

A.  I  do,  most  emphatically. 
By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  occurrence  at  all  ? 
A.  I  do  not. 


Q.  You  remember  nothing  about  them  asking  whether  you 
could  change  them  or  not  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  stated  to  every  one  that  I  could  not  accept  a 
check  drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer. 

Q.  You  remember  that  you  altered  those  three  checks  (indi- 
cating checks),  but  do  not  remember  the  conversation  on  the 
subject  ? 

A.  Only — that  I  can  say  positively — that  my  writing  was 
done  by  authority  and  by  consent  of  the  parties  who  presented 
the  checks  to  me. 

Q.  Have  you  the  books  you  were  requested  to  bring  here 
before  the  Committee  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  here  an  extract  from  the  bond  and 
policy  of  Daniel  Rosenthal.  The  policies  of  insurance  are  for 
$2500  each  from  Daniel  Rosenthal  (referring  to  papers), 
neither  of  the  policies  have  been  renewed,  as  can  be  seen  by 
an  examination  of  them.  Mr.  Rosenthal  has  no  policies  on 
file  in  the  office  that  were  got  since  January  1,  1886.  I  have 
an  extract  made  from  the  bond  book  that  designates  the  bond 
signed  January  5,  1886,  by  Elizabeth  Devine,  security. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  For  Daniel  Rosental  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  insurance  of  Daniel 
Rosental  expired  prior  to  the  1st  of  January  of  this  year. 
A.  It  expired  January  1,  1886. 

Q.  But  since  then  there  has  been  no  renewal  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  So  that  to-day  he  stands  a  defaulter  to  the  extent  of  his 
insurance  policy  at  any  rate  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


324 


Q.  And  is  also  a  defaulter  according  to  your  testimony  on 
the  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  about  the  bond  ? 

A.  It  is  dated  January  5,  1886.  Signed  by  Elizabeth 
Devine. 

Q.  That  is  all  right  then  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  policy  of  insurance  is  not  there,  nor  is  his  money. 
A.  No,  sir,  not  according  to  my  judgment. 
Q.  What  did  you  find  out  about  the  Etta  Heimens  ? 
A.  You  did'  not  give  me  a  memorandum  of  that. 
Q.  You  say  that  she  paid  the  money  to  you  ? 
A.  Well,  I  had  no  memorandum  given  to  me  about  it  with 
that  reference,  and  I  made  no  examination. 

Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) :  I  would  just  remind  the  Com- 
mittee that  she  don't  say  that.    She  is  abroad. 

Mr.  Clay  :  If  the  bond  book  was  produced  we  might  prob- 
ably save  putting  some  questions  to  the  witness. 

The  witness :  It  can  be  produced. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  You  were  asked  to  produce  your  books,  if  you  have  any, 
showing  the  record  of  the  pawnbrokers,  when  they  paid  their 
money,  and  when  their  matters  were  complete.  In  other 
words,  we  Avant  to  know  how  many  there  were  who  completed 
their  arrangements  in  January  ? 

A.  I  have  examined  the  books  carefully,  and  I  have  no  re- 
cord as  to  the  time  they  completed  the  whole  arrangement. 

Q.  Of  any  of  them? 

A.  Except  those  I  recollect  of. 

Q.  Except  what? 

A.  That  I  have  full  knowledge  of  or  remember. 


325 


Q.  Have  you  any  book  to  show  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  no  memorandum  to  show  when  they  completed 
their  bonds  and  policies. 

Q.  Have  you  a  memorandum  to  show  the  names  of  those 
who  did  not  complete  their  arrangements  in  January  ? 

A.  By  comparison  I  might  be  able  to  do  that.  No,  I  could 
not,  because  they  have  complied — most  of  them  in  August. 

Q.  How  could  you  write  to  them  to  hurry  up.  That  they 
must  come  in  and  complete  their  bonds  ? 

A.  I  would  notice  by  the  bond  book  that  they  were  not 
complete. 

Q.  By  Avhich  book  ? 

A.  By  the  bond  book,  and  by  the  policies  being  short. 

Q.  How  could  you  tell  by  the  bond-book  that  they  had  not 
paid  the  money  ? 

A.  Not  by  the  book ;  I  could  tell  whether  the  bond  was 
executed  or  not,  and  by  examining  the  policies  could  tell  about 
the  policies — whether  they  were  there. 

Q.  How  could  you  tell  that  the  policies  were  not  there  of 
those  who  had  not  complied  with  the  law  ? 

A.  Those  were  filed  since  August  22,  and  I  kept  them 
separate  from  the  others. 

Q.  But  I  am  speaking  of  the  time  prior  to  that — January,  * 
March  or  April  ? 

A.  They  were  put  in  and  filed  in  my  fire  proof,  but  no  dates 
■wrere  kept  of  when  they  completed  them. 

Q.  But  you  said  in  your  testimony  this  morning  that  you 
repeatedly  wrote  notes  to  these  people.  I  then  asked  you  to 
produce  your  copy  book  containing  a  record  of  the  notes  that 
you  sent  them.  You  have  not  brought  that  book  with  you  ? 

A.  I  said  that  I  did  not  take  copies  of  them. 

Q.  You  said  you  were  not  sure  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  but  I  have  looked  and  I  have  found  no  copies 
of  such  notes. 


326 


Q.  When  did  you  write  such  notes  ? 
A.  From  time  to  time. 

Q.  About  when  ? 

A.  In  February,  March,  April  and  through  the  year. 

Q.  To  whom  did  you  write  ? 

A.  To  those  who  were  delinquent  ? 

Q.  How  did  you  know  they  were  delinquent  ? 

A. 'By  examining  the  policies  and  their  not  being  on  file. 

Q.  You  would  examine  the  policies  and  they  were  not  there  ? 
A.  I  would  examine  the  policies. 

Q.  How  could  you  tell  who  had  paid? 

A.  By  a  correct  memorandum  of  those  that  I  kept. 

Q.  That  book  showed  those  who  had  paid  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  It  did  not  show  those  who  had  not  paid  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  how  could  you  know  to  whom  to  write  the  notes — 
those  who  had  not  paid  ? 

A.  Well,  at  the  first  of  the  year  through  the  lieutenants  of 
the  different  districts — they  were  required  through  their  men  to 
ascertain  all  the  pawnbrokers  in  the  different  districts  and  re- 
port the  same  ? 

Q.  Their  names  and  locations  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  from  that  list  alone  I  knew  those  who  had 
not  paid. 

Q.  Where  is  that  list  ? 

A.  I  really  do  not  know.  I  may  have  it,  or  I  may  not 
have  it.  It  is  made  out  in  districts — on  slips  of  paper.  I 
may  have  it. 

Q.  Now  of  those  lists  of  districts  you  kept  no  record  ?  You 
did  not  enter  those  lists  in  any  book  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


327 

Q.  So  that  to-day  your  records  do  not  show  a  copy  of  the 
lists  of  the  pawnbrokers  in  the  City  of  Phihadelphia  ? 
A.  I  think  the  lieutenants  have  a  copy  of  the  lists. 
Q.  But  I  am  asking  you  ? 
A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  You  have  no  books  showing  the  names  of  the  pawn- 
brokers who  are  licensed  according  to  law  to-day  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  have. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  book  is  that  ? 

A.  Of  the  licenses'  that  have  been  issued  up  to  No.  37,  I 
think. 

Q.  Have  you  a  book  containing  the  names  of  those  who 
have  paid  the  money? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  That  same  book  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  a  margin  from  which  a  license  was 
taken — of  those  that  were  completed. 

Q.  The  Stubbs  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    And  then  I  have  a  list  of  all  that  have  paid. 

Q.  Have  you  a  list  of  all  those  to  whom  you  are  about  to 
issue  licenses  now  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  that  list  is  correct,  as  to  policies 
of  insurance  and  the  bonds  ? 
A.  I  can  readily  tell  that. 

Q.  By  looking  at  the  bond  book  ? 

A.  By  looking  at  that  and  looking  at  the  policies. 

Q.  But  you  have  no  record  at  all  ? 
A.  No  separate  record. 

Q.  You  said  that  you  wrote  to  a  number  of  the  pawnbrokers 
that  they  must  come  up  ? 

A.  I  often  would  meet  them,  and  I  spoke  to  them  on  the 
subject. 


328 


Q.  And  you  often  wrote  to  them  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Who  were  some  of  them  you  wrote  to  ? 

A.  I  cannot  desigunte.    I  don't  recollect  the  names. 

Q.  Cannot  you  recollect  the  names  of  any  ? 
A.  I  am  not  sure  that  I  could. 

Q.  Not  of  one  ? 

A.  Not  one. 

Q.  You  met  them  on  the  street  sometimes  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    And  called  their  attention  to  the  fact. 

Q.  Did  you  know  them  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir — personally. 

Q.  By  their  names  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Tell  us  the  names  of  some  you  met  on  the  street  and 
asked  to  hurry  up  ? 

A.  I  really  cannot  recollect.  I  paid  no  attention  to  it.  It 
was  casually  done,  and  I  did  not  take  any  pains  to  recollect  it. 

Q.  Not  of  one  of  them  cannot  you  give  the  name  ? 
A.  No,  sir  ;  at  this  time  I  don't  recollect  one  of  them. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  the  names  of  those  to-day  who  have  not 
complied  ? 

A.  I  can.    It  might  take  me  a  little  time  to  go  oVer  it. 

Q.  Will  you  make  such  a  statement  up  and  bring  it  here 
this  afternoon  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where,  in  the  Mayor's  ofl&ce,  are  your  quarters  ? 

A.  On  the  east  side  of  the  building,  the  windows  facing 
Fifth  street. 

Q.  It  is  part  of  the  large  room  where  the  lieutenants  meet 
in  the  morning  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


329 


Q.  How  long  have  you  occupied  that  portion  of  the  office  ? 
A.  I  have  been  there,  1  think,  about  two  years,  or  a  little 
over. 

Q.  Have  you  a  safe  in  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  does  that  safe  contain  ? 
A.  All  my  books — license  books. 
Q.  What  else  ? 

A.  All  the  lieutenants'  books  for  the  various  licenses  that  I 
issue ;  and  it  contains  all  the  policies  of  insurance  and  any 
money  that  I  may  have  on  hand. 

Q.  And  the  bond-book  also  ? 

A.  All  the  books  connected  with  the  issue  of  licenses. 

Q.  And  any  record  that  you  may  have  to  keep? 

A.  There  are  other  records  in  it ;  records  of  ordinances 
that  have  been  approved,  as  well  as  an  abstract  of  all  contracts 
signed  by  the  Mayor,  and  when  signed.  I  think  that  is  about 
all  that  I  have. 

Q.  You  Avill  bring  the  stub-book  over  and  the  book  of  the 
bonds  this  afternoon  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  engaged  now  in  preparing  the  licenses  of  those 
who  have  perfected  their  arrangements? 

A.  1  expect  to-morrow  to  commence  filling  them  all  up. 
It  will  probably  take  me  forty-eight  hours  to  complete  them. 

Q.  This  is  one  of  the  licenses,  is  it  not  (indicating  a 
license)  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  that  your  handAvriting  (indicating  on  the  license)  ? 
A.  It  is. 

Q.  Are  the  license?  signed  by  the  Mayor? 
A.  Always. 

Q.  After  you  fill  them  up  or  before  ? 
A.  After  I  fill  them  up. 
42 


330 


Q.  And  the  seal  is  put  on  afterwards  ? 
A.  After  the  Mayor's  signature. 

Q.  And  then  you  have  to  send  them  to  the  City  Treasurer's 
Office  to  have  the  receipt  put  on  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  then  the  returns  are  sent  by  mail  to  the 
parties  to  whom  they  belong. 

Q.  There  is  not  much  clerical  work  there  (indicating  license) ; 
how  many  of  these  would  you  fill  up,  if  left  alone  to  yourself, 
in  an  hour  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that,  on  a  cool  day,  in  an  hour  I  could 
fill  up  fifty  of  them. 

Q.  How  many  have  you  got  to  issue  ? 
A.  Fifty-three  ;  I  think  it  is. 

Q.  So  that  w^ould  be  a  little  over  an  hour  of  your  time  ? 
A.  But  that  would  be  but  a  small  portion  of  the  work  to  be 
done  in  connection  with  the  work  to  complete  them. 

Q.  What  is  the  other  portion  ? 

A.  Signing  by  his  Honor  the  Mayor,  and  sealing  them,  and 
sending  them  to  the  City  Treasurer,  and  then  having  them  re- 
turned back  to  me,  and  then  mailing  them.  It  will  take  all  of 
forty-eight  hours  to  accomplish  that,  I  think. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Do  you'  collect  a  uniform  fee  from  all  the  pawnbrokers  ? 
A.  No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  collect  any  fee  from  them. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  license. 
A.  I  beg.  pardon;  I  collect  them  all. 

Q.  You  charge  each  man  uniformly  a  hundred  dollars  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  made  any  effort  to  ascertain  whether 
there  were  pawnbrokers  doing  more  than  ten  thousand  dollars' 
worth  of  business  annually  ? 

A.  I  have  very  often  made  an  effort  to  collect  more  than  the 
hundred  dollars. 


331 


Q.  What  have  those  efforts  consisted  of? 

A.  I  have  asked  the  amount  of  business  done  the  year  pre- 
vious, and  they  have  reported  to  me  that  it  was  within  the 
limit  of  the  one  hundred  dollar  license  fee.  I  have  asked  them 
what  business — and  it  was  a  very  foolish  question  to  put  to- 
them — what  business  they  expected  to  do  in  the  coming  year. 
They  could  not  reply,  but  I  did  not  expect  a  reply  from  them. 
The  only  charge  under  the  law  possible  to  make  then,  is  that 
of  a  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  You  say  you  simply  asked  them  whether  they  did  more 
than  would  come  within  the  limits  of  the  hundred  dollar  fee  ? 
A.  I  did  ask  them  repeatedly. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  require  from  them  such  evidence  of  the 
character  of  their  business  as  would  convince  you  that  their 
business  did  not  exceed  a  hundred  dollar  fee  ? 

A.  They  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Did  you  put  them  under  oath  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  was  impossible  to  tell  what  would  be  done 
in  the  following  twelve  months. 

Q.  But  couldn't  they  tell  you  what  had  been  done  in  the 
preceding  twelve  months  ? 

A.  They  could ;  and  I  put  the  question.  They  would  say 
that  it  had  been  Avithin  the  limit  of  the  one  hundred  dollar 
license. 

Q.  And  you  accepted  their  statements  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  You  never  thought  that  the  law  gave  you  the  right  to 
demand  or  require  from  them  such  assurances  as  to  the  amount 
of  business  they  were  doing  ? 

A.  They  gave  it  to  me  on  their  words  of  honor  that  it  did. 
not  exceed  the  limits  of  the  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  And  you  were  content  with  them  ? 
A.  I  was. 


332- 


Q.  Are  there  not  a  number  of  private  watchmen  sworn  in 
during  the  year  as  police  officers  ? 
A.  I  believe  there  are. 

Q.  Who  are  furnished  with  badges,  in  order  to  show  their 
authority  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that. 

Q.  Who  keeps  the  record  of  the  private  watchmen  sworn  in? 
A.  I  believe  the  assistant  clerk. 

Q.  What  is  his  name  ? 
A.  Ezra  Lukens. 

Q.  Is  there  a  fee  charged  for  swearing  them  in  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  it. 

Q.  Who  would  know  that  ? 

A.  I  presume  Ezra  Lukens  himself  would. 

Q.  He  keeps  a  record  doesn't  he  ? 

A.  I  presume  so.    I  do  not  know  that  even. 

^y  Mr.  Reinstine. 

Q.  You  stated  this  morning  that  you  received  all  the 
moneys  for  the  licenses  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  a  cash  book  ? 

A.  I  have  a  book  for  the  entries;  when  I  receive  them  1 
put  it  down  on  a  slip  first ;  taking  the  name  of  the  party  on 
the  slip  and  designating  whether  the  policy  is  filed  and 
whether  the  bond  is  filed. 

Q.  Have  you  no  cash-book  where  you  put  down,  for  in- 
stance, a  hundred  dollars  as  received  from  John  Smith — credit 
it  to  cash  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  because  I  pass  the  money  over  immediately  out 
of  my  hands. 

Q.  To  whom  ? 

A.  To  the  Mayor ;  and  he  deposits  it  in  bank. 


333 


Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  a  proper  way  to  put  it 
down  in  a  cash-book  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  be  a  better  way  to  do  it ;  but  I  have 
not  done  it  that  way. 

Q.  How  can  you  keep  your  accounts  straight  if  you  do  not 
keep  them  that  way  in  a  casK-book  ? 

A.  I  have  no  necessity  for  a  cash-book,  because  the  money 
is  passed  immediately  over  and  deposited  in  bank. 

Q.  But  couldn't  those  slips  be  lost  by  you,  or  might  not  his 
Honor  the  Mayor  mislay  them  ?  Do  you  not  think  it  would 
be  a  proper  Avay  to  keep  such  a  cash-book  ? 

A.  Probably  it  would. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  any  such  account  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


Isaac  H.  Shields^  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testi- 
fied as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A.  I  practise  law\ 

Q.  We  have  been  informed  by  his  Honor  the  Mayor  that, 
in  regard  to  the  law  relating  to  these  licenses,  he  has  been 
guided  by  the  advice  of  his  counsel,  Isaac  H.  Shields,  Esq. 

A.  I  am  that  person. 

Q.  Will  you  give  us  any  statement  or  explanations  you  have 
to  make  ? 

A.  Some  time  in  the  spring  of  1885,  the  Mayor  asked  the 
question  if  the  moneys  paid  by  the  pawnbrokers  into  the 


334 


hands  of  Major  Linton  at  the  time  of  making  their  applica- 
tions for  licenses  were  city  moneys,  or  whether  they  were 
received  by  Major  Linton  as  the  agent  of  the  pawnbrokers  ? 
I  told  him  that  in  law  the  money  was  received  as  agent  for 
the  pawnbrokers,  and  was  not  city  money. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Was  that  in  answer  to  a  question  from  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  As  to  what  he  should  do  with  the  money  ? 

A.  I  said  that  some  time  in  the  spring  of  1885,  the  Mayor 
asked  me  if  the  moneys  paid  to  Major  Linton  by  the  pawn- 
brokers on  application  for  their  licenses  were  the  moneys  of 
the  city,  or  whether  Major  Linton  in  receiving  the  money  was 
simply  the  agent  of  the  pawnbrokers  ?  I  advised  him  that 
the  money  was  in  the  hands  of  whoever  received  it  at  that 
office — whether  Major  Linton  or  any  other  person — as  an 
agent  of  the  pawnbrokers,  and  became  the  city's  money  only 
when  the  license  should  be  granted.  Then  it  was  the  city's 
money. 

Q.  You  were  going  on,  I  believe,  to  make  a  further  state- 
ment ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  had  ceased ;  I  was  reflecting  whether  that 
was  not  a  full  answer  to  the  question  ;  I  think  that  answers 
the  point. 

Q.  That  was  early  in  1885? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  do  not  remember  the  date,  but  I  know  it  was 
in  the  spring  of  1885. 

Q.  Would  that  have  been  your  answer  if  Major  Linton  had 
-paid  the  money  over  to  his  Honor  the  Mayor  ?  Would  the  re- 
lation still  have  continued  to  be  that  the  Mayor  was  the  agent 
of  the  pawnbrokers  ? 

A.  Unquestionably — yes,  sir. 


335 


Q.  Unquestionably  the  relation  would  have  continued,  you 
say? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Wherever  that  money  then  and  now,  wherever  it  could 
be  found,  it  would  be  the  pawnbroker's  money  ? 

A.  That  was  my  judgment  then  and  it  is  my  judgment 
now ;  I  was  clearly  of  the  opinion  that  it  was  wrong  to  put 
that  money  into  the  Treasury,  for  if  the  license  should  not  be 
granted  by  the  Mayor,  it  would  put  the  citizen  to  the  expense 
of  getting  his  money  out  of  the  Treasury,  and  it  seemed  only 
fair  to  my  mind  as  well  as  legal. 

Q.  Did  the  Mayor  ask  you  what  he  should  do  with  the 
money  after  the  paw^nbrokers  had  perfected  their  licenses  ? 

A.  Not  a  word  was  said  about  it  to  me. 

Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman. 

Q.  Do  you  still  hold  that  opinion  ? 
A.  I  do  hold  that  opinion  still. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  Your  opinion  was  not  that  after  the  license  was  issued 
the  money  was  still  the  pawnbrokers  ? 
A.  My  opinion  was  not  asked  about  that 

Q.  It  was  only  in  regard  to  the  money  that  had  been  paid 
and  the  license  not  issued  ? 

A.  The  question  was  pending,  or  the  investigation  was, 
whether  or  not  the  license  should  be  granted,  and  the  question 
was,  whose  money  is  it — is  the  city's  or  the  pawnbrokers  ?  I 
gave  it  as  my  opinion,  as  an  humble  citizen,  and  as  an  humble 
lawyer,  that  until  the  license  was  granted  it  was  the  pawn- 
broker's money  in  the  hands  of  his  agent. 


336 


William  B.  Smith,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  tes- 
tified as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  You  are  the  Mayor  of  the  City  ? 
A.  I  am. 

Q.  Will  you  please  make  to  the  Committee  any  statement 
you  may  have  to  make,  bearing  upon  the  matter  under  investi- 
gation ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  In  the  latter  part  of  1884  persons  mentioned 
to  me  that  the  pawnbroker's  licenses  were  not  uniformly  and 
fairly  paid  orcollected.  I  instructed  Major  Linton,  who  was  then 
in  the  office  as  Secretary  to  myself,  to  examine  into  the  prece- 
dents in  the  office  and  report  to  me  the  modes  that  had  been 
adopted  for  their  collection.  The  matter  had  previously  been 
in  the  hands  of  Mr.  Marcer  who  was  at  this  time  in  a  delicate 
condition  of- health,  and  not  able  in  my  opinion,  to  follow  up 
the  matter  legitimately  to  a  conclusion.  Upon  looking  at  the 
records  I  found  that  only  sixty  pawnbrobers  had  paid  during 
the  preceding  year.  I  noticed  the  gradual  decrease  in  the 
number,  and  I  feared  that  the  law  was  not  fully  and  fairly 
carried  out  in  regard  to  all,  but  that  some  pawnbrokers  hadn't 
paid.  Major  Linton  presented  to  me  a  statement  showing 
some  matters  of  record,  and  showing  a  correct  list  of  the  pawn- 
brokers that  had  paid,  and  there  were  only  a  very  small  portion 
of  them,  possibly  half  a  dozen,  who  had  complied,  as  I  remem- 
ber, with  the  requirements.  I  was  advised  further  that  it  had 
been  the  habit  to  make  a  small  compensation  to  the  clerks.  I 
made  a  little  inquiry  about  it,  and  found  that  it  was  a  volun- 
tary offer.  I  went  to  a  pawnbroker  who  was  a  friend,  and  he 
said  it  has  been  a  habit,  and  said  the  Mayor  has  nothing  to  do 
with  it — it  is  done  as  a  matter  of  kindness  to  the  official.  In 
the  meantime  I  directed  the  preperation  of  a  circular  (copies 
of  which  are  upon  record)  directing  Major  Linton  first  of  all, 
to  notify  the  Lieutenants  of  each  district  that  they  should  se- 


i 


337  I 

secure  a  correct  list  of  all  the  pawnbrokers  and  their  residences.  | 

Upon  the  receipt  of  that  list  it  was  laid  upon  mj  desk,  or  by  ; 

him  handed  to  me,  and  he  was  directed  to  communicate  with  ' 
them  and  say  that  the  law  must  be  carried  out  in  its  entirety — 
that  they  must  file  an  application  and  place  an  insurance  policy 

with  the  loss  payable  to  the  Mayor — the  policy  was  not  nec-  ' 
cessarily  to  be  in  the  name  of  the  Mayor,  but  in  case  of  a  loss 
that  it  should  be  payable  to  the  account  of  the  City  of  Phila- 
delphia— and  that  they  must  file  a  bond.  There  was  a  great 
deal  of  difficulty  and  contention,  and  I  was  waited  upon  and 
the  endeavor  w^as  made  to  induce  me,  as  a  matter  of  politics 

and  wisdom,  not  to  enforce  the  law.    It  was  said  that  it  had  not  I 

been  enforced  in  the  past  and  that  it  was  not  necessary.    I  still  ' 

believed  that  it  would  be  for  the  protection  of  the  city.    I  was  | 

anxious  to  have  the  greatest  knowledge  possible  of  that  busi-  ; 

ness,  and  felt  that  if  any  matter  connected  with  the  Police  De-  ] 

partment  could  be  benefitted  by  a  relationship  which  would  give  I 

us  knowledge  and  control  of  it,  it  would  be  a  good  thing.  About  I 

this  time  I  consulted  my  attorney,  Mr.  Shields,  in  the  capacity  ' 
of  private  counsul  early  in  '85,  possibly  in  the  second  or  third 
month  of  the  year.    He  advised  me  on  the  position  I  assumed, 

a  position  that  agreed  with  my  own  thoughts  and  feelings,  and  ■ 

which  has  the  support  of  every  one  of  the  five  gentlemen  who  \ 

represent  me  before  this  body.    Upon  that  opinion,  and  with-  | 

out  any  willingness  to  distrust  my  secretary,  I  consented,  at  j 

his  request,  to  place  this  money  upon  deposit.    I  have  stated  j 

to  you,  in  a  previous  communication,  that  my  account  as  treas-  ■[ 

urer  was  a  general  account,  never  truly  official,  often  personal.  ; 

I  placed  this  money  in  that  account,  and  I  felt  completely  sat-  ■ 

isfied  that  the  City  of  Philadelphia  could  be  put  to  no  loss —  ; 

could  not  lose  one  cent  of  her  money.    I  never  for  a  moment  < 

had  such  an  apprehension  or  thought.  I  have  always  had  re-  ' 
sources  far  more  than  the  amount  that  was  liquidated  at  any 

time  subject  to  demand  in  my  hands  as  Mayor  of  the  City  of  i 

Philadelphia.    When  this  demand  was  made  upon  me,  after  a  j 

delay  which  was  caused  somewhat  by  my  unwillingness  to  be  I 
43 


'i 


338 


driven  into  a  position  I  didn't  think  to  be  tenable,  I  could 
have  paid  the  City  Treasurer  with  the  direct  cash  out  of  the 
safe  in  my  office ;  but  in  preference  to  doing  that,  I  deposited 
the  money  in  bank,  and  sent,  for  safety  and  convenience,  a 
check  to  the  City  Treasurer's  Office.  I  have  at  all  times, 
since  I  have  been  the  Mayor,  without  running  after  any  man, 
and  without  accepting  proffers  of  bribes  in  my  duties,  had  suf- 
ficient money  to  meet  every  honest  obligation  that  could  ever 
have  existed  against  me.  In  regard  to  the  dog  money,  I  can 
only  say  that  when  I  went  into  office  I  spoke  to  Mr.  March 
about  it,  seeing  a  memorandum  in  a  report  which  come  to  me. 
I  saAv  in  the  office  the  contract,  but  I  had  no  knowledge  that 
any  money  was  ever  directly  realized  from  the  dogs — as  com- 
ing directly  into  the  Police  Department.  I  saw  Mr.  March, 
and  he  said  that  the  contract  is  here  and  you  must  make  an 
assignment  of  some  one  under  it.  Thereupon  I  assigned  Mr. 
March  as  the  agent  to  handle  that  money.  Then  I  said  to 
Mr.  March,  "How  about  your  accounts?"  At  the  end  of  a 
year,  Mr.  Bardsley,  in  order  to  get  up  the  annual  message,  it 
is  necessary,  incidentally,  to  inquire  of  all  those  men,  and  to 
get  memoranda  of  their  accounts.  When  Mr.  March  came  to 
me,  he  came  with  a  certified  audit  from  the  City  Controller. 
I  will  say  that  the  amounts  from  all  these  sources  are  very 
irregular.  I  have  prepared  a  statement  showing  the  receipts 
from  each,  for  the  last  ten  years,  showing  the  irregularity  in 
the  amounts,  and  how  much  opportunity  there  may  have  been 
for  just  such  occurrences  as  have  come  to  light.  Upon  finding 
the  account  certified  to  by  the  City  Controller,  I  felt  assured 
the  matter  was  all  proper,  and  until  that  announcement 
made  yesterday,  I  had  no  knowledge  of  any  discrepancy 
in  that  gentleman's  accounts.  In  regard  to  the  oil  fees,  I 
will  say  that  Marshall  Wood  and  Major  Linton  spoke  to  me 
about  the  matter  incidentally,  after  the  visit  of  the  Board 
of  Fire  Underwriters.  I  expressed  to  them  the  fear  that 
it  was  not  a  tenable  position  to  collect  the  money ;  but 
with  those  gentlemen  I  believe,with  both  the  ex-Marshal  and 


339 


the  Major,  that  it  would  be  for  the  benefit  of  the  city,  in  regard 
to  fire  insurances.  I  had  no  knowledge  of  the  relation  between 
them,  never  knew  of  any  understanding  between  them  for  a 
division  of  the  money  until  I  read  it  in  the  public  prints.  I 
would  not  have  permitted  it  for  one  moment  had  I  known  it. 
As  regards  the  collection  of  moneys  by  Major  Linton  I  will 
simply  say  that  I  ordered  him,  in  pursuance  of  his  own  request 
to  bring  me  as  speedily  and  as  regularly  as  possible  the.  pawn- 
broker's licenses ;  as  to  the  other  moneys  they  were  left  un- 
touched in  his  hands,  and  I  will  say  I  am  quite  confient  they 
were  in  his  hands  intact,  until  turned  over  to  me  on  the  day 
on  which  I  made  my  return.  I  never  felt,  gentlemen  of  the 
Committee,  a  responsibility  for  the  city  in  the  receipt  of  this 
money,  upon  myself  ofiicially.  I  was  positive  in  my  belief  that 
if  these  pawnbrokers  had  any  claim,  it  was  against  Wm.  B. 
Smith  and  not  against  the  City  of  Philadelphia.  That  was  the 
belief  in  my  mind — my  opinion  ;  but  in  deference  to  the  City 
Solicitor's  opinion  which  became  the  legal  one,  the  current  of 
my  thought  was  changed.  There  are  people  to-day  applying 
for  licenses  whom  I  fear  I  cannot  license  as  the  Mayor  of  Phila- 
delphia. Now  as  regards  the  Mayor's  prerogatives,  so  far  as 
this  is  concerned,  I  felt  assured  that  he  had  an  absolute  control 
of  the  receipts  of  those  moneys,  to  remain  in  his  hands  until 
the  licenses  were  presented  upon  my  desk.  When  they  have 
been  presented  upon  my  desk  it  has  been  my  habit  to  make 
inquiry  through  the  police  department,  as  to  the  character  of 
the  people  who  wanted  them,  before  I  signed  them  and  some- 
times they  have  been  delayed,  with  the  result  that  this  year  I 
have  memor.anda  of  persons  which  will  prevent  me,  I  fear  from 
issuing  licenses  to  those  people.  I  want  to  say  to  the  Com- 
mittee that  I  am  open  to  the  fullest  questioning,  either  as  to 
the  methods  of  the  Department,  the  details  of  the  men  or  the 
management  of  the  force.  I  have  nothing  to  hide  from  you. 
I  have  done  nothing  concerning  which  I  seek  to  escape  inquiry. 
I  think  I  have  acted  for  the  reputation  and  for  the  best  interest 
of  the  city  ;  and  I  am  willing  to  be  interrogated  in  whatever 


340 


may  tend  to  the  enlightenment  of  the  public  or  the  justifica- 
tion of  myself. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  You  heard  the  testimony  of  your  secretary? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  You  heard  him  testify  that  by  your  orders  he  had  exam- 
ined carefully  into  the  law  governing  the  issue  of  warrants  to 
pawnbrokers  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Consequently,  he  and  you  were  conversant  with  the.law? 
A.  We  were. 

Q.  Doesn't  the  law  require  that  the  pawnbrokers  must  get 
their  licenses  in  January? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  The  law  expressly  states  that  they  must  be  issued,  and 
they  expire  the  following  January.  Consequently,  after  the 
1st  of  January  they  w^ould  be  conducting  business  without 
licenses,  if  they  were  not  issued.  You  are  aware  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  a  misdemeanor  for  a  man  to  conduct  that  business 
without  a  license  ? 

A.  I  am  aware  of  that,  but  it  is  not  in  my  hands  to  correct  ? 
I  can  only  communicate  with  the  City  Solicitor,  and  he  must 
open  suit.  I  will  say  that  during  1885  Major  Linton  inci- 
dentally— not  in  an  official  statement — from  time  to  time  said 
to  me,  Mr.  Mayor,  there  are  some  details  and  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  getting  out  these  licenses ;  they  are  partly  in  form 
and  everything  will  be  all  right — as  soon  as  these  people  bring 
to  me  what  is  necessary.  I  said  to  him  repeatedly,  now, 
Major,  you  will  hurry  up  the  license  matters ;  but  I  never  did 
anything  but  instigate  him  to  a  little  more  speed  in  preparing 
them. 

Q.  It  has  been  testified  to  before  this  Committee,  and  the 
testimony  has  been  corroborated  by  checks  which  w^ere  pro- 
duced, that  licenses  were  paid  for  by  pawnbrokers  in  the  month 


341 


of  January,  1885,  but  that  the  licenses  to  those  pawnbrokers 
were  not  issued  until  December,  1885.  Now,  how  do  you  ex- 
plain to  this  Committee  that  you  and  your  department  were 
justified  in  permitting  that  delay,  and  how  are  you  justified  in 
not  notifying  the  City  Solicitor  of  such  dereliction  on  the  part 
of  applicants  for  license  ? 

A.  I  can  only  say  in  answer  that  I  kept  no  record,  and 
depended  entirely  upon  the  Secretary  for  records  of  the  pay- 
ments. He  kept  the  dates  of  the  payments,  and  when  the 
collateral  provisions  incident  to  them  were  complete,  he  could 
at  any  time  come  to  me  with  them.  When  I  spoke  to  him,  he 
said  that  they  had  not  yet  filed  their  policies  of  insurance  of 
deposited  their  bonds,  and  that  as  soon  as  they  do  so  I  will 
bring  you  their  licenses.  I  didn't  go  over  the  account  ad 
interim  during  the  year. 

Q.  What  term  would  3^ou  apply  to  the  management  of  an 
ofiice  that  would  allow^  people  to  carry  on  an  illegitimate  busi- 
ness for  eleven  months  ?  What  would  be  an  apt  term  to  ap- 
ply to  the  management  of  such  an  office  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  I  don't  know  what  term  I  would  apply 
to  the  management  of  that  office,  because  it  is  not  my  place  to 
apply  terms  to  any  person.  I  would  certainly  say  that  a  de- 
partment which  did  not  enforce,  in  so  far  as  it  could,  provi- 
sions which  were  made  absolute,  was  derelict  in  its  duties.  But 
I  suppose  the  term,  where  there  may  be  a  punishment,  don't 
change  the  condition  of  matters. 

Q.  I  am  not  speaking  about  the  punishment.  I  wanted  to 
get  your  view^s  about  such  dereliction  and  directed  your  atten- 
tion to  it  in  what  might  be  considered  an  official  character  ? 

A.  It  is  more  neglect  of  duty  than  a  misdemeanor. 

Q.  Where  these  persons  have  continued  in  that  manner  for 
eleven  months  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  is  almost  as  bad  as  under  previous  admin- 
istrations ;  perhaps  not  quite  so  bad,  but  almost.  It  is  no 
worse  certainly.    I  want  to  show  that  in  these  matters  the 


342 


City  of  Philadelphia  has  not  been  injured  but  helped.  For 
the  year  1886  there  is  a  variance  of  $1,600  between  the  low- 
est and  the  highest.  In  1883  it  was  only  $6,700,  and  there 
was  only  collected  in  1884,  $7,100;  and  in  1885,  $7,500; 
and  in  1886,  $8,000. 

Q.  There  are  certain  arrangements  which  must  be  com- 
pleted before  licenses  can  be  secured  ? 

A.  It  is  my  honest  belief,  as  an  official  of  the  City,  that 
there  is  no  power  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  Penn- 
sylvania which  could  be  exercised  upon  me  to  force  me  to  issue 
a  license  if  I  should  have  reason  to  think  that  it  was  not  well 
that  it  should  be  issued. 

Q.  I  agree  with  you  in  that  entirely.  But  what  I  want  to 
get  at,  is  this  :  There  are  certain  things  that  must  be  done 
to  enable  an  applicant  to  get  a  license  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  One  is  to  file  a  bond,  and  another  is  to  file  a  policy  of 
insurance,  both  of  which  are  for  the  protection  of  the  deposit- 
ors of  the  pawnbrokers,  and  the  third  is  the  payment  of  a 
license  fee  of  $100.  It  appears  to  be  the  opinion  of  these 
pawnbrokers,  that  all  that  is  necessary  for  them  to  do,  is  to 
pay  $100,  and  that  their  duty  is  performed.  Now,  when  they 
conduct  their  business  without  having  complied  with  all  the 
provisions  of  the  ordinance  referred  to,  namely,  the  filing  of 
a  bond,  and  a  policy  of  insurance  and  the  payment  of  the 
$100  fee — every  day  they  conduct  their  business,  it  is  conducted 
to  the  jeopardy  of  their  depositors,  is  it  not  'i 

A.  Certainly. 

Q.  There  is  no  security,  then,  for  the  goods  deposited  there 
during  the  time  a  pawnbroker  conducts  his  business  without 
having  complied  with  the  law — without  having  a  license. 
Now,  it  is  somebody's  business  to  protect  those  depositors. 
Let  me  ask  you  whose  duty  it  is  ? 

A.  So  far  as  the  duty  is  implied  by  the  filing  of  the  policy 
of  insurance  and  the  bond,  certainly  it  is  the  duty  of  the  police 
department — of  the  Mayor's  office. 


343 


Q.  The  police  department  can  order  a  pawnbroker  to  com- 
ply with  the  law,  or  to  cease  business  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  notified  a  pawnbroker  on  the  first  of  January  that 
he  must  renew  his  policy  and  comply  with  the  law.  If  he  did 
not  do  that,  could  not  you  immediately  notify  him  that  he 
must  stop  his  business  until  he  did  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Whose  duty  is  that  ? 

A.  Under  the  law  it  would  be  my  duty  to  notify  the  City 
Solicitor  if  that  man  persevered  in  business,  and  then  he  could 
prosecute  him  for  the  penalty. 

Q.  What  penalty  ? 

A.  One  thousand  dollars. 

Q.  A  number  of  the  pawnbrokers  testified  that  they  had 
complied  with  all  of  the  provisions,  but  had  not  received  their 
licenses.  Major  Linton  has  told  us  that  the  reason  the  licenses 
were  not  issued  was  because  he  was  reserving  them  until  such 
time  as  would  suit  his  convenience  and  the  convenience  of  the 
City  Treasurer  to  receive  the  money — that,  therefore,  he  did 
not  issue  those  licenses.  The  Major  further  testified  that 
every  day  he  made  a  return  to  you  of  the  moneys  received  on 
account  of  those  license  fees  ? 

A.  The  Major's  habit  was  this — he  received  those  pay- 
ments in  his  small  room,  which  is  45  or  50  feet  distant  from 
my  room.  At  the  close  of  each  day,  when  he  had  money,  he 
would  come  in  and  say,  "  Mr.  Mayor,  deposits ;"  simply  hold- 
ing the  bankbook  up  and  saying  "  deposit."  In  other  words, 
it  was  that  he  was  going  to  bank.  If  there  were  any  checks 
that  required  to  be  endorsed  he  used  to  pull  the  slide  out  of 
my  desk  and  would  simply  lay  them  down,  face  downward, 
and  get  my  endorsement  on  them,  and  then  take  them  and 
deposit  them  in  bank. 


344 

Q.  Then  you  really  did  not  know  upon  any  day  whether, 
or  not,  John  Smith,  for  instance,  had  paid  his  license  ? 
A.  I  had  no  knowledge  of  it. 
Q'.  That  was  left  entirely  to  Major  Linton? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So,  that  if  John  Smith  were  to  come  to  you  and  ask 
you  for  a  license,  telling  you  that  he  had  paid  for  it  in  Jan- 
uary, you  would  not  know  whether  he  had  paid  or  not  ? 

A.  I  can  say  that  no  complaint  ever  reached  me — that  up 
to  the  time  of  this  publication  there  never  was  a  complaint  to 
me  in  connection  with  the  duties  of  that  office.  I  have  never 
been  a  witness  of  the  payments  made  upon  any  of  these  sub- 
jects.   I  have  never  seen  a  policy  paid  into  the  office. 

Q.  In  1885  it  appears  that  none  of  the  moneys  were  paid 
into  the  Treasury  until  December  ? 

A.  In  August. 

Q.  But  the  major  part  was  in  December.  The  City  Treas- 
urer's return  shows  that  certain  moneys  were  paid  for  that 
purpose  in  August.  Were  there  any  complaints  through  1885 
as  to  the  non-issuing  of  the  licenses  ? 

A.  No  complaint  has  ever  reached  me  upon  the  subject. 
If  complaints  were  made,  they  must  have  been  made  to  some 
one  else,  and  never,  with  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Did  no  pawnbroker  ever  ask  you  for  a  license  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  No  one  complained  that  any  pawnbroker  was  conducting 
his  business  illegally  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  never  any  discussion  about  the  danger  to  the 
community  of  allowing  their  business  without  licenses ;  was 
there  never  any  fault  found  ? 

A.  We  have  never  had  any  police  difficulty  with  the  pawn- 
brokers. We  have  on  all  occasions  since  the  commencement 
of  the  administration  claimed  the  right  to  daily  open  and  ex- 
amine the  books  of  their  establishments,  which  right  they  have 


345 


accorded  without  cavil.  And  in  very  few  instances  have  we 
found  that  the  goods  there  were  not  properly  up  on  the 
registers. 

Q.  Now,  you  say  that  you  w^ere  not  aware  of  the  discrep- 
ancies of  Mr.  March  until  he  testified  yesterday  ? 

A.  I  was  not — no  more  than  you,  yourselves. 

Q.  He  was  asked,  yesterday,  when  he  would  have  returned 
this  money  to  the  City  Treasury  had  not  this  investigation 
been  started.  His  answer  was  that  he  did  not  know,  but  that 
he  certainly  would  have  returned  it  previous  to  the  expiration 
of  his  term.  So,  I  ask  you  the  same  question.  Suppose  that 
this  agitation  had  not  been  started,  when  would  you  have  paid 
this  money  .  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 

A.  At  the  very  earliest  moment  that  I  could  when  Major 
Linton  brought  his  statement  to  me. 

Q.  That  undoubtedly  would  have  been  before  the  expiration 
of  this  year  t 

A.  Without  question. 

Q.  According  to  your  statements  to  the  City  Controller, 
you  had  some  $8,000  or  $9,000  to  the  credit  of  the  city  in 
your  hands,  or  in  other  words  you  had  in  your  hands  what 
your  counsel  said  were  moneys  for  which  you  were  the  agent 
for  the  pawnbrokers,  to  that  amount.  Did  you  keep  that 
money  in  a  separate  account  ? 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  deposited  that  ? 

A.  I  deposited  it  in  a  general  running  account,  which  cov- 
ered, during  a  portion  of  this  year,  the  sum  of  $48,000  in 
deposits,  and  I  had  always,  either  in  my  individual  pocket,  in 
my  safe,  in  my  office,  or  in  my  business,  ample  ready  cash  to 
meet  the  entire  obligation  which  was  due  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia. 

Q.  Then  at  all  times,  in  your  safe  or  in  your  pocket,  you 
had  at  least  $9,000  ? 

A.  In  individual  cash  and  resources  of  my  own. 
44 


346 


Q.  So,  that  you  could,  at  any  time,  have  replaced  that 
money  ? 

A.  Upon  the  first  intimation.  The  City  Solicitor  could  not 
have  called  upon  me,  at  any  time,  and  failed  to  receive  the 
money. 

Q.  In  the  testimony  produced  before  this  Committee  by  the 
officers  of  the  Fidelity  Trust  Company,  the  statement  was  made 
that  you  had  an  account  in  tha:^  bank,  and  that  statement  wa& 
corroborated  this  morning  byi^Major  Linton.  An  officer  of  the 
bank  testified  that  you  simply  had  an  account  as  William  B. 
Smith,  Treasurer,  and  a  statement  of  that  account  was  pro- 
duced here.  Major  Linton,  in  his  testimony  this  morning, 
thought  you  deposited  the  checks  or  the  moneys  paid  in  by  the 
pawnbrokers  in  the  account  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer, 
in  the  Fidelity  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Company  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  An  officer  of  the  bank  produced  a  transcript  of  your  ac- 
count which  showed  that  at  the  time,  according  to  the  state- 
ment of  moneys  received,  when  you  should  have  had  some 
$8,000  or  more  in  your  possession,  that  your  account  was 
overdrawn.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  at  the  time  that 
account  which  contained  the  City's  money  was  overdrawn  you 
had  in  your  possession  sufficient  funds  to  make  all  good  ? 

A.  Absolutely.  I  was  absent  from  the  city  when  the  ac- 
count was  overdrawn,  when  the  two  checks  were  protested. 
The  error  came  from  failing  to  check  off"  a  check  slip  when  the 
check  was  drawn.  When  I  left  the  city  to  go  on  my  trip  I 
left  at  my  office,  in  Major  Linton's  hands,  outside  of  any 
necessary  sum,  a  round  sum  of  money  that  was  larger  than  the 
amount  of  the  two  checks — simply  for  the  protection  of  bills 
that  might  be  presented.  Upon  the  eve  of  my  departure  I 
wrote  out  those  checks  and  mailed  them.  There  was  one  check 
which  I  had  failed  to  take  off".  When  the  bank  notice  came  to 
my'  office  in  my  absence  it  was  in  a  sealed  envelope,  which 
there  was  no  authority  to  open,  and  they  went  to  protest.  But 
they  were  paid  on  my  return.    A  deposit  was  made. 


347 


Q.  You  say  that  by  the  advice  of  your  counsel,  Mr.  Isaac 
H.  Shields,  Esq.,  you  retained  these  moneys  as  not  being  city's 
moneys.  Why  didn't  you  ask  the  advice  of  the  City  Solicitor 
on  that  point  instead  of  the  advice  of  Mr.  Shields  ? 

A.  Because  there  was  no  question  or  doubt  in  my  own  mind 
as  to  the  legal  position.  I  asked  him  simply  as  an  attorney 
and  his  opinion  vindicated  my  own  so  strongly  that  there  was 
not  a  shadow  of  doubt  about  it.  If  there  had  been  any  doubt 
about  it  I  would  have  asked  the  opinion  of  the  City  Solicitor. 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  doubt  about  it  now  ? 

A.  No.  I  think  I  was  perfectly  and  legally  right  in  the 
matter.  I  think  the  money  shouldn't  have  been  received  at 
the  office,  but  being  received  it  was  not  city  money  until  the 
licenses  for  which  it  had  been  paid  were  issued. 

Q.  The  City  Solicitor  disagreed  with  that  view,  upon  a' 
question  put  by  you  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  upon  the  reception  of  his  opinion  you  

A.  Upon  the  same  day  I  paid  every  cent  over. 

Q.  The  money  you  paid  over  was  part  and  parcel  of  this 
money  to  which  you  have  referred  as  having  either  in  your 
pocket  or  in  your  safe  at  the  time  the  city  money  had  been  paid 
you? 

A.  It  was  made  up  entirely  of  ready  money  which  I  had  at 
my  command. 

Q.  Which  you  could  have  paid  ? 

A.  At  any  moment,  either  to  the  individual  pawnbroker  or 
upon  the  demand  of  the  city. 

Q.  You  reconcile  the  fact  of  your  account  being  overdrawn- 
by  your  absence  from  the  city  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  may  have  been  careless  in  banking  funds, 
but  I  was  satisfied  of  my  own  financial  ability,  knowing  that. 
I  was  in  no  financial  distress.  I  have  never  been  in  a  condi- 
tion to  require  money. 


348 


Q.  Without  being  personal,  may  I  not  ask  you  whether  you 
are  not  naturally  careless  in  money  matters  ? 

A.  I  may  possibly  be  a  little  easy,  not  careless ;  I  think 
that  for  the  amount  of  work  I  do,  taking  my  good  qualities 
along  with  the  bad,  I  do  it  as  well  as  any  man  could,  covering 
so  much  labor ;  I  may  be  a  little  negligent  in  money  matters, 
but  that  negligence  has  always  been  against  myself — not  against 
anybody  else. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  you  strike  a  fair  average  ? 

A.  I  never  wronged  any  man  in  my  life. 

Q.  If  you  had  this  money  at  your  command,  as  you  have 
stated,  don't  you  think  it  would  have  saved  a  great  deal  of 
trouble  if  you  had  made  this  statement  at  first  ? 

A.  It  would  have  ;  but  when  a  public  man  is  assaulted  and 
charged  with  almost  everything  he  can  be  charged  with,  and 
hounded  down,  his  manhood  w^ill  not  permit  him  to  humble 
himself  sufficiently  to  go  upon  the  stand,  even  to  vindicate 
himself ;  will  not  permit  him  to  make  any  defense  until  such 
time  as  there  can  be  an  official  investigation. 

Q.  I  hope  that  you  do  not  refer  to  the  Committee  in  saying 
that  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  nothing  of  the  kind.  I  want  to  say  that  to 
yourself  and  to  the  other  members  of  the  Committee ;  and  to 
say  to  the  Committee  that  I  will  answer  any  questions  that 
you  want  to  ask  me. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  You  appoint  the  subordinates  in  your  office  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  My  immediate  subordinates  I  selected  because 
of  the  confidence  I  had  in  them.  I  selected  my  secretary  and 
Mr.  March  and  those  who  immediately  surrounded  me  in  my 
position,  because  of  confidence  in  them  and  not  because  of 
political  considerations. 

Q.  They  are  entirely  subject  to  your  direction  and  control? 

A.  I  believe  they  are.  When  they  communicate  to  me  any 
facts,  I  give  them  orders  and  expect  them  to  do  the  work. 


349 


Q.  You  are  responsible  for  the  manner  in  which  they  do' 
their  work  ? 

A.  I  feel  the  fullest  responsibility  and  I  have  never  shrinked 
any  liability  that  could  fall  upon  me  because  of  their  neglect 
of  duty. 

Q.  Now  you  have,  at  all  times,  you  say,  had  in  your  posses- 
sion or  in  your  safe  sufficient  money  with  which  to  make  good 
any  over-drafts  upon  the  Fidelity  account  ? 

A.  I  have  had  ample  and  more  at  any  time  to  pay  any  claim 
that  could  be  made  against  me. 

Q.  Has  that  been  your  custom  to  carry  about  so  much  money 
in  cash  ? 

A.  It  has  been  my  custom  since  I  have  been  in  public  life 
to  keep  by  me  a  large  sum  of  money.  I  have  thought  it  a 
wise  and  good  thing  to  do. 

Q.  What  amounts  have  you  had  ? 

A.  From  $5,000  to  over  $15,000.  As  a  rule  I  judge  about 
$8,000.  I  have  had  that  money  in  ready  cash  at  my  command, 
or  in  other  collaterals  worth  as  much,  if  it  was  not  in  ready 
cash. 

Q.  You  say  the  two  checks  issued  in  July — that  the  fact  of 
their  going  to  protest  was  owing  to  your  absence  from  the 
city  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  left  the  office  on  the  evening  of  the  6th,  and 
prior  to  going  drew  a  check.  I  took  that  off,  but  omitted  one 
check,  which  was  a  large  one,  and  which  had  used  up  my  bal- 
ance. Then  I  was  absent  from  the  city.  I  thought  that  there 
was  ample  money. 

Q.  That  was  on  the  6th  of  July  ? 

A.  The  6th  of  July  that  I  mailed  the  checks. 

Q.  When  did  you  return  ? 

A.  I  think  I  returned  on  the  15th. 

Q.  Of  July  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


350 


Q.  Did  you  then  remain  in  the  city? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Until  what  time  ? 

A.  I  was  not  out  of  the  city  except  in  going  on  the  even- 
ing train  to  Atlantic  for  almost  a  month. 

Q.  Then  daily,  for  a  month,  you  were  in  the  city  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  with  one  or  two  exceptions.  I  think  I  passed 
three  days  at  Atlantic  City  this  season.  When  I  came  back 
the  first  thing  I  found  was  these  protests  or  memorandums 
from  the  bank.  The  Major  and  Mr.  Fell,  who  by  means  of 
the  protest  had  become  acquainted  with  the  matter,  advised 
me  that  it  had  been  fixed  in  my  absence ;  in  other  words,  that 
a  deposit  had  been  made,  which  cleared  the  whole  matter  up, 
and  that  everything  was  all  right.  The  checks  were  both  paid 
before  they  came  into  my  possession.  They  went  into  bank 
the  second  time  and  were  paid. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  time  when  you  made  the  deposit  in 
order  to  make  them  good  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  it  was  made  by  me.  What  is  the  memo- 
randum ? 

Q.  There  is  a  deposit  on  the  sixth  and  one  on  the  seventh. 

A.  I  was  absent  when  that  was  made.  The  check  that 
came  in  on  my  slip,  and  which  was  omitted,  was  unfortunately 
-one  of  the  largest  checks  I  drew.  It  was  for  $3,500,  and  by 
being  omitted  destroyed  my  whole  account.  When  I  left 
Philadelphia  I  felt  sure  there  were  $3,000  in  that  account. 

Q.  You  had  forgotten  to  deduct  that  check  ? 

Q.  Yes,  sir.  It  didn't  appear  on  my  slip.  When  I  came 
back  and  was  told  the  account  was  overdrawn,  I  wouldn't 
believe  it. 

Q.  The  evidence,  as  we  have  it  before  the  Committee,  is 
that  the  two  checks  were  drawn  on  the  6th  of  July — one  num- 
ber 108,  and  the  other  106  ? 

A.  They  were  both  personal  checks — both  purely  personal 
checks. 


351 


Q.  And  you  say  those  checks  were  protested  owing  to  your 
having  previously  drawn  a  check  for  $3,500  which  was  not 
taken  from  the  account  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  check  of  $3,500  preceded  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  When  I  received  my  settlement,  the  discrep- 
ancy was  not  shown.  When  I  received  the  settlement,  the 
check  of  $3,500  was  left.  You  will  find  it  in  that  balance 
which  was  shown  you. 

(Referring  to  the  pamphlet  of  evidence  before  Mr.  Clay.) 

Q.  No.  The  check  of  $3,500  that  you  allude  to  was  not 
drawn  until  the  8th  of  July. 

A.  I  don't  know  when  it  was  drawn.  But  these  were  out 
of  the  city  checks.  Neither  one  could  have  reached  here  for 
two  or  three  days,  or  not  for  a  few  days.  One  went  to  Naza- 
reth, for  my  son's  tuition,  and  one  went  to  New  Jersey;  it 
came  back  from  Jersey.  The  large  check  was  drawn  for  Phila- 
delphia. It  was  a  city  check,  and  the  others  were  out  of  the 
city. 

Q.  When  you  returned  on  the  15th  of  July,  you  were  in 
the  city  daily? 

A.  Yes,  sir — ^\ith.  the  exception  of  Sundays. 

Q.  Did  you  go  away  in  the  month  of  August? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  What  time  in  that  month  ? 

A.  I  think  on  either  the  11th  or  the  12th. 

Q.  When  did  you  return  again  ? 

A.  I  returned  on  the  16th  or  17th.  I  know  by  the  day  of 
the  week,  but  not  by  the  day  of  the  month. 

Q.  According  to  what  you  have  said  to  the  Committee,  you 
returned  about  the  15th  of  July? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ;  about  that  time.  * 


352 


A.  And  you  remained  in  the  city  for  a  month,  daily  going^ 
back  and  forth  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  tell  us  that  the  two  checks  of  July  6th  were 
protested  because  of  your  absence  from  the  city,  and  your 
consequent  inability  to  make  the  account  good  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  But  during  the  time  you  were  in  the  city  you  kept  an 
account  of  what  your  bank  balances  were — didn't  you  ? 

A.  I  thought  nothing  about  it.  I  heard  about  the  protests 
and  heard  they  were  corrected.  I  had  no  other  knowledge 
about  it. 

Q.  What  the  condition  of  your  bank  account  was  after  your 
return  you  were  personally  responsible  for  ? 
A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Will  you  tell  the  Committee  why,  on  the  8th  of  August 
then,  your  bank  account  was  overdrawn  $97.50  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you.  I  have  not  had  the  privilege  that  you 
gentlemen  have  had.  I  have  not  had  my  bank  book  and  have 
not  had  the  checks.  I  have  not  had  the  means  of  informing 
myself  as  you  gentlemen  of  the  Committee.  My  book  has 
been  in  the  bank  or  has  been  in  your  hands.  I  cannot  explain 
what  I  do  not  know.  I  simply  state,  that  if  that  is  the  case, 
it  is  certainly  an  error.  I  have  not  received  my  checks  from 
the  bank.  I  have  asked  for  them  but  have  not  received  them. 
I  want  to  say,  that  this  account  I  have  never  considered  a 
matter  of  official  responsibility  ;  it  is  an  account  that  has  run 
on  for  six  years,  and  which  has  carried  many  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  dollars  in  that  time. 

Q.  Yet,  during  the  early  part  of  August  and  the  latter  part 
of  July,  when  you  were  in  the  city,  there  was  scarcely  any- 
thing to  your  credit  in  that  account.  I  find  that  on  the  20th 
of  July  it  was  $5.17  to  your  credit  (referring  to  the  printed 
evidence  before  him). 

A.  One  would  be  glad  to  have  even  that  sometimes. 


353 


Q.  Why  would  you  permit  that  state  of  affairs  to  exist  if 
you  had  $8,000  in  your  safe  ? 

A.  Because  I  felt  that  I  was  not  responsible  for  the  identical 
money  that  was  received  from  individuals,  but  that  I  was  re- 
sponsible only  to  make  good  their  demands.  If  I  had  con- 
sulted some  of  my  friends  in  the  office — for  instance,  General 
Stewart — I  would  have  sent  the  ready  money  to  the  City 
Treasury,  but  preferred  to  send  a  check.  Perhaps  I  was  in 
error  about  that ;  but  I  felt  that  it  was  no  business  of  the  City 
of  Philadelphia  whether  I  sent  a  check  or  the  notes,  if  I  made 
good  my  obligations.  I  never  gave  it  very  grave  considera- 
tion. 

Q.  You  have  already  said  that  you  looked  upon  this  money 
as  trust  money,  in  your  communication  ? 

A.  I  have  not  said  anything  of  the  kind ;  but  if  it  v/as  a 
trust  it  faithfully  fulfilled. 

Q.  You  looked  upon  it  as  trust  money  ? 
A.  I  was  responsible  for  it. 
Q.  It  was  not  money  of  your  own  ? 
A.  By  no  means. 

Q.  You  fully  understood  that  the  mixing  of  those  moneys 
with  your  own  funds  did  not  relieve  you  from  responsibility  ? 

A.  I  will  say  that  it  was  an  annoyance  to  me  rather  than  a 
benefit ;  and  if  it  was  to  be  gone  over  again,  I  wouldn't  on  any 
account  be  troubled  with  it.  I  would  rather  open  a  separate 
account. 

Q.  Now,  if  I  understand  the  correspondence  which  has 
taken  place  between  you  and  the  City  Solicitor,  and  also  the 
advice  which  was  given  to  you  by  your  counsel,  Mr.  Shields, 
just  so  soon  as  the  license  fee  had  been  paid  and  the  bond 
executed,  and  the  policy  of  insurance  delivered,  and  just  so 
soon  as  all  you  required  in  regard  to  other  things  was  satisfied, 
then  the  pawnbroker  was  entitled  to  his  license  ? 

A.  Most  undoubtedly. 
45 


354 


Q.  Now,  the  Committee  have  had  testimony  before  them  to 
the  fact  that  a  number  of  pawnbrokers  had  complied  with  all 
the  requirements  exacted  by  your  department,  and  notwith- 
standing that  their  money  was  still  held  by  either  you  or 
Major  Linton,  their  licenses  were  not  issued. 

A.  The  money  was  not  held  by  my  consent  or  approval. 
I  would  not  have  permitted  it.  It  was  held  because  I  was  ad- 
vised by  the  Major  that  he  had  no  licenses  ready  to  issue.  He 
has  so  stated  to  me.  During  '85,  on  repeated  occasions,  I  have 
asked  him  to  hurry  matters  forward  on  my  desk,  repeatedly. 

Q.  You  have  knowledge  of  the  ordinance  requiring  the  pay- 
ment of  the  city's  moneys  into  the  City  Treasury  on  the  day 
they  are  received. 

A.  Yes ;  but  I  have  no  knowledge  of  the  application  of 
such  an  ordinance  to  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia. 

Q.  But  you  had  knowledge.  I  ask  you  the  question.  You 
have  knowledge  of  the  ordinance  requiring  the  payment  [of 
the  city's  moneys  into  the  City  Treasury  on  the  day  they  are 
received  ? 

A.  Yes  ;  I  do  have  that  knowledge,  but  as  I  do  not  have 
the  knowledge  that  those  were  the  city's  moneys  I  cannot  see 
how  that  ordinance  was  binding. 

Q.  You  understand  that  all  moneys  due  the  city  are  to  be 
paid  in  on  the  date  of  their  receipt  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  You  do  not  state  it  right.  It  is  not  all  mon- 
eys due  the  city,  but  all  moneys  paid  into  the  departments. 

Q.  Do  you  have  a  knowledge  of  the  ordinance  which  re- 
quires that  all  moneys  paid  into  the  departments  belonging  to 
the  city  are  to  be  paid  into  the  City  Treasury  on  the  day  of 
their  receipt  ? 

A.  Since  this  discussion,  I  have  a  fair  knowledge  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  not  have  such  a  knov/ledge  of  it  before  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  any  department,  or  that  the  various 
departments  of  the  city,  were  aware  of  its  existence.  I  know 
they  did  not  comply  with  its  requirements. 


355 


Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  office  ? 
A.  Since  April  7,  1884. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  efforts  to  inform  yourself  about  the 
laws  and  your  duties  ? 

A.  I  have  made  fair  efforts  to  look  into  them,  I  presume. 

Q.  According  to  what  Mr.  Shields  told  you,  it  appears  that 
certain  requirements  were  to  be  met  before  the  money  could 
be  turned  over  by  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  those  requirements  met  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  To  my  satisfaction  they  were  met  entirely  in 
'85.  I  have  official  reports  from  statements  submitted  to  me 
that  they  had  complied  with  my  requirements  entirely,  and  I 
have  collateral  knowledge  that  those  reports  are  correct. 

Q.  What  were  the  requirements  ? 

A.  Exactly  what  has  been  stated  to  you — the  conditions  of 
the  ordinance ;  the  filing  of  the  bond  and  the  deposition  of  the 
policy  of  insurance,  and  the  satisfactory  character  of  the  ap- 
plicant and  the  payment  of  the  money.  The  payment  of  the 
money  to  myself  was  not  a  consideration,  but  its  payment  to 
the  City  Treasurer  was  an  absolute  condition. 

Q.  Then  all  the  pawnbrokers  who  received  licenses  in  '85 
had  complied  with  the  conditions  of  your  department? 
A.  That  is  my  belief. 

Q.  Therefore  their  licenses  were  issued  in  December  ? 
A.  They  commenced,  I  think,  in  August  and  Jfinished  in 
December. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  those  requirements  having 
been  complied  with  in  '86  ? 

A.  I  have  knowledge  that  twenty-seven  of  them  have 
passed  my  desk.    Beyond  that  I  have  no  knowledge. 

Q.  When  did  that  occur  ? 

A.  Upon  the  23d  day  of  August,  upon  my  request,  the 


356 


Major  officially  advised  me  that  they  had  complied  with  the 
requirements. 

Q.  You  had  not  signed  any  licenses  before  that  ? 

A.  I  never  sign  until  the  payment  is  made. 

Q.  You  had  knowledge,  however,  of  the  pawnbrokers  who 
continued  their  business  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  but  I  did  not  have  knowledge  that  they  must 
be  licensed  in  January.  I  presumed  that  the  account  was  a 
running  account,  exactly  as  accounts  of  other  fees  and  licenses 
of  the  city.    That  it  must  be  complied  with  in  the  year. 

A.  You  are  acquainted  with  this  provision  of  the  ordinance 
(referring  to  the  Digest  of  the  City  Ordinances) : 

The  Mayor  of  the  City  may,  from  time  to  time, 
give  and  grant  a  license  under  the  seal  of  the  Corpora- 
tion, to  such  persons  as  shall  apply  for  the  same,  to 
use,  exercise,  or  carry  on  the  business  of  a  pawbroker, 
which  said  licenses  shall  continue  in  force  until  the 
first  day  of  the  month  of  January  following  (unless 
sooner  revoked  by  the  Mayor,  which  he  is  hereby  au- 
thorized to  do,  on  legal  conviction  of  a  violation  of  any 
of  the  provisions  of  this  ordinance)  and  no  longer." 
A.  That  is  right.    That  is  my  construction  of  it.    But  I 
had  no  knowledge  that  it  must  be  taken  out  at  any  time,  only 
that  it  must  be  taken  out  early  in  the  year,  and  the  earlier 
the  better  for  the  city. 

Q.  Now,  I  understand  that  the  policy,  in  case  of  loss, 
should  be  made  payable  to  you.  Was  that  desired  to  protect 
the  depositors  and  for  their  best  interests  ? 

A.  I  never  required  that  it  should  be  made  payable  to  me — 
but  payable  to  the  Mayor  of  Philadelphia.    No  name  was  used. 
Q.  What  was  your  object  ? 

A.  Because  in  that  case  the  policy  could  be  held  with  a 
view  to  indemnifying  the  depositors  for  their  losses.  When 
such  a  policy  was  in  existence  those  people  would  be  protected 
in  case  of  loss  by  fire  in  the  pawnbrokers'  place. 


357 


Q.  You  thought  it  -was  a  good  rule  and  you  adopted  it,  and 
thouo-ht  YOU  were  entitled  to  commendation  for  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  was  positive  tliat  it  was  the  intention  of  the 
ordinance. 

Q.  And  you  thought  that  you  were  better  protecting  the 
pledgers  of  goods  in  that  way  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  it  was  for  their  best  interests  ? 

A.  That  it  was  for  the  good  of  the  individual  who  was  un- 
fortunate enough  to  have  to  use  a  pawnbrokers'  establishment. 

Q.  Why  didn't  you  exhibit  a  like  zeal  for  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  ? 

A.  In  what  manner  ? 

Q.  In  having  these  pawnbrokers  take  out  their  licenses  ? 

A.  Well,  I  have  already  told  you  that  I  delegated  that  mat- 
ter to  the  Secretary,  and  I  supposed  that  he  attended  to  his 
duties  and  was  attentive  to  his  service.  If  he  was  not,  it  was 
I  as  well  as  the  city  who  suffered.  I  knew  that  so  for  as  the 
city  was  concerned — I  knew  that  the  city  received  every  penny 
for  every  license  that  was  issued,  and  I  knew  that  we  had  in- 
creased the  number  of  licenses  so  that  we  had  turned  into  the 
city  $1,600  more  than  during  my  predecessors'  term.  I  do 
not  think  that  the  city  is  losing  much,  and  would  like  to  furn- 
ish for  record,  and  as  a  matter  of  justice  to  myself,  this  state- 
ment or  report  of  Major  Linton's  (producing  and  exhibiting  a 
paper)  asking  the  Committee  to  place  it  on  record.  I  would 
like  to  have  it  read. 

Mr.  Iseminger  : 

I  move  that  the  clerk  read  the  communication. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Iseminger — 
it  was  agreed  to. 

The  paper  presented  by  the  witness,  Mayor  Smith,  is  here 
read  by  the  clerk  of  the  Committee,  Mr.  Eckstein,  as  fol- 
lows : 


358 


"  I,  John  L.  Linton,  touching  the  issue  of  pawnbrokers  and 
other  licenses  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  do  declare  that  prior 
to  September,  1884,  I  was  directed  by  his  Honor  the  Mayor 
to  investigate  and  report  to  him  the  manner,  under  previous 
administrations,  as  to  how  the  licenses  were  collected  and  all 
other  matters  bearing  upon  the  same. 

In  pursuance  of  these  instructions  I  made  a  careful  ex- 
amination of  the  requirements  of  the  law  as  well  as  all  the 
facts  referring  to  the  same,  that  had  taken  place  under  ex- 
Mayor  King  (the  last  of  his  term)  and  made  report  of  the  same 
to  the  Mayor. 

"  From  this  examination  I  found  that  eighty-three  (83) 
pawnbrokers  had  been  in  the  business  during  1884,  and  that 
no  returns  had  been  made  of  13  out  of  this  number  who  were 
in  the  business  to  the  City  Treasurer  for  their  licenses ;  that 
bonds  for  nineteen  (19)  of  those  that  had  paid  their  licenses 
were  never  executed,  and  of  the  seventy  (70)  who  had  paid 
only  seven  had  filed  policies  of  insurance  with  the  then  Mayor. 

On  making  this  report  to  Hon.  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor, 
he  gave  me  positive  instructions  in  the  future  to  make  each 
pawnbroker  comply  fully  Avith  the  requirements  of  the  law. 

"  About  January  1st,  1885,  when  pawnbrokers  called  upon 
me  to  pay  for  licenses,  I  made  known  to  them  that  the  Mayor 
insisted  upon  their  compliance  with  the  law ;  nearly  all  of  them 
objected  and  delayed  after  being  notified  time  and  time  again  ; 
this  delay  in  many  cases  continued  until  the  latter  part  of  the 
year  1885.  " 

During  the  year  1886  the  same  notification  was  given  and 
a  large  number  delayed  depositing  their  policies  of  fire  insur- 
ance. Since  August  22d  last,  most  of  the  fire  insurance 
policies  have  been  deposited  with  me  and  have  executed  their 
bonds.  There  still  remains  a  small  number  who  have  not 
complied  with  the  law. 

"  The  charge  that  I  demanded  five  dollars  in  addition  to  the 
license  fee  is  without  foundation.  I  positively  deny  it.  The 
pawnbrokers  all  know  that  if  demanded  they  would  be  required 


359 


to  bring  their  bonds  properly  filled  up  to  be  executed  in  my 
presence.  This  trouble  has  been  saved  them.  I  prepared 
their  bonds  and  they  had  only  to  sign  them ;  from  this  fact 
they  probably  felt  under  some  obligation  to  me,  but  I  never 
made  any  claim  for  such  service  upon  any  one  of  them. 

"  With  regard  to  the  charge  of  alterations  of  checks,  I  have 
to  say  that  invariably  I  refused  to  accept  any  and  all  checks 
drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  and  when  presented 
asked  the  person  offering  them  to  make  them  payable  to  the 
order  of  the  Mayor  or  bearer,  which  they  did ;  possibly  in  some 
cases  I  may  have  done  it  for  them,  if  so,  it  was  with  their  full 
knowledge  and  consent.  The  moneys  received  by  me  from 
pawnbrokers,  when  in  banking  hours,  were  regularly  deposited 
in  the  Fidelity  Trust  Company  to  the  credit  of  William  B. 
Smith,  Treasurer.  When  checks  required  endorsement  they 
were  often  so  endorsed  without  the  Mayor  seeing  the  face  of 
them.  When  told  what  they  were  given  for,  in  most  cases  I 
would  make  up  the  check  for  deposit.  In  the  absence  of  the 
Mayor  the  checks  were  held  by  me  for  endorsement  until  his 
return. 

Coal  Oil  Licenses. 

"  There  were  31  wholesale  coal  oil  licenses  and  30  retail 
dealers  who  paid  up  to  March  20th,  1886. 

"  The  Mayor,  prior  to  these  collections,  expressed  to  me  his 
doubts  of  the  clearness  of  the  law  with  reference  to  them,  and 
in  my  examination  found  that  during  Ex-Mayor  King's  term 
a  very  small  amount  had  been  collected. 

"  Ex-Fire  Marshal  Wood  urged  me,  in  December  of  last  year, 
to  impress  the  Mayor  with  the  necessity  and  importance  of 
their  collection,  and  said  he  would  do  all  in  his  power  to  obtain 
the  Mayor's  consent  and  approval  permitting  him  to  notify  all 
persons  liable  for  the  license.  This  he  did,  and  sent  out  notices 
to  the  wholesale  and  retail  dealers. 

"  He  said  to  me  that  as  I  would  collect  the  licenses  of  $10, 
it  would  oblige  him  if  I  would,  at  the  same  time,  collect  for 
him  the  survey  fees  ;  this  I  objected  to  do  at  first ;  he  said 


360 


that  he  could  not  be  present  when  they  paid,  and  that  if  col- 
lected by  me,  using  his  own  language,  he  would  '  cut  the  sur- 
vey fees  in  two.'  I  reluctantly  agreed  to  collect  his  survey 
fees,  and  paid  them  over  to  him  daily,  the  amount  received 
by  me. 

''On  the  24th  day  of  May,  1886,  I  wrote, 'by  direction  of 
his  Honor  the  Mayor,  an  official  note,  calling  his  attention  to 
the  City  Solicitor's  opinion  with  reference  to  retail  oil  dealers 
not  being  liable  for  the  license  and  survey  fee  which  had  already 
been  paid  him.  To  this  note  no  written  reply  has  been  made. 
I  also  sent  him,  on  the  same  day,  a  personal  note,  stating  that 
whatever  of  his  fees  for  surveys  he  would  have  to  return,  that 
I  would  gladly  return  all  he  had  paid  me,  to  make  him  whole. 
Ex-Fire  Marshal  Wood  wrote  me  a  private  note  after  this, 
asking  me  to  meet  him  outside  of  the  office.  I  did  this,  but 
regret  it ;  and  told  him  that  about  30  retail  dealers  would 
have  to  be  paid  back  not  only  the  $10  for  license,  but  also  the 
survey  fees  he  had  received  ;  that  I  believed  he  had  made  no 
survey  on  retail  dealers  ;  if  so,  no  report  in  writing  by  him 
had  been  made  to  me.  Wood's  reply  was  that  only  six  or 
seven  retailers  had  paid.  I  became  indignant,  and  said  if  he 
could  so  deliberately  misrepresent  the  matter  that  I  would 
hold  no  further  conversation  with  him,  and  asked  him  to  reply 
in  writing  to  my  official  letter,  and  left  him. 

"After  the  decision  of  the  City  Solicitor,  with  reference  to 
retail  dealers,  the  difficulty  to  know  who  Avas  entitled  to  a  re- 
turn of  the  money  paid  arose  in  this  wise :  As  to  what  quan- 
tity of  oil  a  retailer  could  be  permitted  to  keep  on  hand  and 
be  free  from  license  ;  this  only  has  caused  the  delay  in  the 
return  of  the  money  to  them  directly.  The  City  Solicitor's 
opinion  does  not  define  the  quantity  they  could  hold  and  be 
free ;  we  could  use  no  discretion  in  the  matter,  and  hoped  that 
some  test  case  in  Court  would  have  settled  it ;  but  now,  so  far 
as  this  Department  is  concerned,  the  money  being  paid  into 
the  City  Treasury,  we  are  relieved  from  its  further  considera- 
tion. 


361 


"All  money  received  by  me  for  licenses,  except  that  for 
pawnbrokers,  was  kept  in  the  fire  proof  in  my  office,  never 
used  in  any  way  nor  for  any  purpose,  neither  by  the  Mayor 
nor  myself,  and  was  promptly  paid  over  when  called  for.  The 
omission  that  occurred  was  caused  principally  by  a  separate 
account  kept.  When  a  change  in  Fire  Marshal  occurred. 
Wood  being  displaced  and  Emery  appointed  in  his  place 
there  was  no  intention  to  defraud  nor  was  there  any  desire  to 
conceal  from  any  one  the  true  and  correct  list  of  those  who 
had  paid. 

"  I  desire  to  repeat  that  of  the  thirty-one  wholesale  dealers, 
Ex-Marshal  Wood  received  from  me  his  survey  fee  in  each 
case,  and  that  we  have  on  file  only  twenty-six  surveys  made 
by  him.  I  also  paid  Wood  for  thirty  retail  surveys,  that  he 
Las  received  the  money  for  sixty-one  surveys,  and  has  only 
filed  in  this  office  his  report  of  twenty-six  as  having  been 
made. 

"  I  desire  to  add  that  after  receiving  instructions  from  the 
Mayor  that  I  was  to  compel  the  pawnbrokers  to  comply  fully 
with  all  the  provisions  of  the  law  as  to  licenses.  The  whole 
management  and  conduct  of  this  department  of  the  business  of 
the  office  was  left  in  my  hands,  that  if  there  was  any  undue 
delay  I  alone  am  responsible  for  it,  as  in  every  case  the  Mayor 
paid  over  the  money  immediately  on  my  report  that  the  pawn- 
broker had  entitled  himself  to  receive  the  license. 

"JOHN  L.  LINTON." 

Ey  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Councils,  at  its  meeting  on  last  Thursday,  passed  a  pre- 
amble and  resolution,  under  which  this  Committee  was  ap- 
pointed.   The  preamble  reads  as  follows  : 

"  Whereas^  Honorable  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of 
Philadelphia,  has  been  openly  and  publicly  accused  of 
high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  in  office,  by  the  embez- 
zlement and  misuse  of  .public  moneys  which  have  come 
into  his  hands,  and  with  unlawfully  changing  and  so 
46 


1 


362  1 

I 

altering  checks  drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treas-  ; 

urer,  in  payment  of  fees  due  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  i 

as  to  be  enabled  to  deposit  such  checks  in  a  private  ' 

banking  institution  to  his  account,  and  unlawfully  re-  ' 

tain,  embezzle,  and  misuse  the  moneys  realized  there-  ! 

from,  and  of  other  acts  and  deeds  inconsistent  with  the  i 
high  office  of  Mayor  and  the  proper  management  of  the 
department  under  him,  the  same  being  in  violation  of 

the  laws  and  ordinances  governing  and  regulating  the  j 

affairs  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia."  ^ 

Then  follows  the  resolution,  a  portion  of  which  reads  aa  1 

follows :  [ 

"And  the  said  Committee  are  hereby  instructed  and  ; 

directed  to  make  report  to  Common  Council,  at  a  special  j 

meeting  to  be  held  Thursday  next  (September  9th)  at  ^  i 

o'clock  P.  M.,  as  to  the  truth  or  falsity  of  such  accusa-  a 

tions.    And  if  the  truth  of  such  accusations  be  estab-  \ 

lished  by  the  facts  and  proofs  exhibited  before  said  * 

Committee,  that  their  report  be  accompanied  by  articles  ' 

of  impeachment  against  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  ; 

Philadelphia."  ^ 

Speaking  for  myself,  and  I  think  I  can  speak  for  the  entire 
Committee,  I  will  say  that  this  is  a  very  important  subject  we  j 
are  investigating,  and  speaking  entirely  for  myself,  as  one  j 
member  of  the  Committee,  1  feel  that  the  most  thorough  in-  j 
vestigation  of  this  subject  should  be  made,  to  the  end  that  if  | 
the  charges  are  untrue  you  should  have  the  full  and  entire  ] 
benefit  thereof,  and  if  they  are  true,  that  the  facts  should  be  j 
established.    Therefore  I  may  perhaps  ask  you  some  questions  | 
that  you  may  think  impertinent,  and  which  I  know  will  be  ^ 
disagreeable,  but  they  will  be  put  simply  for  the  purpose  of  ■ 
getting  to  the  bottom  facts,  that  they  may  be  the  better  as- 
certained.   Your  statement  this  afternoon  to  the  Committee  ] 
opens  up  a  line — if  you  will  allow  me  to  call  it  such — of  de- 
fense that  has  hitherto  been  kept  entirely  secret — entirely 

I 
J 

\ 


363 


secret  from  the  public,  and  particularly  from  this  Committee. 
I  feel  that  in  connection  with  the  statement  in  reference  to  the 
money  in  the  safe,  that  nothing  should  be  left  unasked  or  un- 
answered that  will  fairly  satisfy  the  Committee  on  that  par- 
ticular point.  When  you  informed  the  Committee  in  your 
communication  on  the  first  day  the  Committee  met,  I  pre- 
sumed that  you  informed  us  wholly  and  entirely  of  all  you  had 
to  say  upon  the  subject,  and  to  me  it  looks  singular  that  you 
should  have  omitted  so  important  a  statement  as  you  have 
made  this  afternoon. 

A.  I  don't  admit  that.  And  I  will  ask  you  to  read  a  para- 
graph in  my  communication,  which  I  will  point  out  to  you, 
and  ask  you  to  read  it  loud  enough  for  the  Committee  to 
hear  it. 

Q.  What  shall  I  read  ? 

A.  I  will  find  it  for  you  very  quickly. 

(The  witness,  Mayor  Smith,  here  takes  the  printed  book  of 
evidence  and  referring  to  his  communication,  sent  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  first  day  of  its  sessions,  read  as  follows) : 

"In  no  respect  and  to  no  extent,  I  respectfully  con- 
tend, can  I  be  charged  with  the  embezzlement  or  mis- 
use of  the  moneys  of  any  person  or  persons  when,  at 
the  demand  of  such  person,  as  at  the  direction  of  the 
City  Solicitor,  I  was  prepared  at  any  moment  either  to 
pay  back  to  the  person  or  over  to  the  city  any  and  all 
amounts  in  my  hands." 

"  Upon  the  question  as  to  whether  such  moneys  could, 
in  any  sense,  be  considered  '  public  moneys  in  my  hands ' 
until  all  the  preliminaries  were  perfected,  I  took  the 
opinion  of  my  counsel,  Mr.  Shields,  and  was  advised 
by  him  that  they  were  not  the  moneys  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  until  the  license  should  be  granted ;  that 
the  secretary  could  only  receive  them  as  the  agent  of 
the  applicant,  and  that  it  would  be  his  duty  to  repay 
them  to  the  applicant  in  the  event  of  any  subsequent 


364 


refusal,  for  any  valid  reason,  to  grant  the  license.  He 
further  advised  me  that,  in  granting  the  license,  it  was 
my  duty  to  immediately  pay  the  money,  in  each  case, 
to  the  City  Treasurer.  Acting  upon  such  advice,  that 
they  were  not  public  moneys  until  the  license  was 
granted,  I  deposited  such  money  in  my  own  name,  in 
an  account  which  I  have  had  with  the  Fidelity  Insur- 
ance, Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Company  for  many  years. 
This  account  was  originally  opened  on  December  8, 
1880,  and  several  years  before  my  election  as  Mayor, 
in  my  name,  as  '  Treasurer.'  The  reason  for  this  was, 
that  as  I  was  entrusted  with  a  great  variety  of  funds 
from  a  number  of  societies  in  which  I  held  official 
position,  as  well  as  from  other  sources  apart  from  my 
business,  though  in  some  instances  personal,  and  in 
amounts  so  small  as  not  to  justify  separate  accounts 
for  each  deposit,  I  thought  it  advisable  and  proper  to 
open  an  account  that  could  be  readily  distinguished 
from  that  connected  with  my  business,  and  so  did  under 
the  name  of  'William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer.'  In  one 
instance  where  the  amount  justified  it,  I  did  have  a 
separate  account  as  '  Trustee, '  and  it  was  partially  for 
that  reason  that  I  selected  the  new  term  'Treasurer' 
for  this  general  account.  The  sum  of  $48,095.71  has 
been  deposited  by  me  to  that  account  during  this  year, 
of  which  but  about  $8,000  consisted  of  the  license  and 
fees  in  question.  Not  believing  the  money  to  be  public 
money,  and  knowing  full  well  my  financial  ability  to 
repay  the  same,  I  may  have  been  careless  in  some  in- 
stances in  keeping  my  balances  up ;  but  I  acted  in  good 
faith,  and  with  no  intention  of  wronging  the  city,  as  is 
evidenced  by  my  immediate  payment  of  the  whole 
amount  into  the  City  Treasury  when  so  advised  by  the 
City  Solicitor,  upon  the  same  day  I  received  such 
udvice. 


365 


By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  You  did  not  consider  it  necessary  in  that  communication 
to  say  you  had  the  money  in  cash  in  the  safe  in  your  office  ? 

A.  That  would  not  have  made  it  any  stronger. 

Q.  That  was  a  matter  of  your  own  discretion. 

A.  I  can  substantiate  my  word  in  that  respect.  I  have 
witnesses  to  prove  it. 

Q.  In  1885  the  bulk  of  the  money  belonging  to  the  city 
you  paid  into  the  Treasury  in  December  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  One  of  the  largest  payments  of  the  year  was  on  the  last 
day  of  the  year,  after  being  requested  to  do  so  by  the  officials 
of  the  city,  although  the  testimony  we  have  here,  which  I 
presume  you  had  read. 

A.  I  have  not.    I  have  not  had  the  time  to  read  it. 

Q.  Well,  then,  the  testimony  we  have  here  of  the  pawn- 
brokers is  that  the  major  part  of  the  money  was  paid  in  Jan- 
uary, and  that  the  greater  number  of  them  performed  all  their 
duties  in  January  and  February  of  that  same  year  ? 

A.  They  did  not. 

Q.  I  am  only  giving  you  their  testimony  ? 
A.  I  understand  that. 

Q.  And  they  are  unanimous,  I  think,  with  one  exception, 
and  made  their  statements  under  oath.  In  188G — I  presume 
you  have  read  the  testimony  of  the  City  Controller  in  the  pub- 
lic newspapers — in  1886,  he  stated  that  in  May  and  June  he 
asked  you  to  make  your  returns  to  his  office  ? 

A.  He  had  not.  Does  he  state  that  he  asked  me  in  May 
and  June  ?  In  the  month  of  May  he  communicated  with  my 
office  by  telephone,  but  I  received  no  such  communication  in 
June. 

Q.  Well,  then,  say  in  May.  In  May  of  this  year  he  asked 
you,  and  you  said  that  you  were  giving  it  your  attention  ? 

A.  I  will  simply  say  that  I  called  at  the  Controller's  office 
in  the  month  of  May  concerning  the  payment  of  certain  war- 


866 


rants,  and  concerning  the  purchase  of  horses,  as  I  did  not 
want  to  have  any  difficulty  under  the  contract,  but  to  liave 
everything  amicably  and  satisfactorily  settled.  At  that  inter- 
view, at  which  I  was  accompanied  by  General  Stewart,  I  am 
positive  that  not  one  word  was  said  to  me  upon  the  matter. 
I  am  so  willing  to  testify. 

Q.  Have  you  not  seen  the  Controller's  account  of  the  inter- 
view ? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  And  up  to  this  moment  you  have  not  contradicted  it  ? 

A.  I  did  not  contradict  it  for  this  reason,  that  the  Con- 
troller himself  said  that  he  knew  of  no  means  by  which  he 
could  make  that  demand  upon  me,  but  when  he  asked  for  a 
detailed  statement  it  came  at  once.  I  had  no  knowledge  that 
I  could  have  communicated  to  the  Controller  off-hand,  and  if 
he  had  spoken  to  me  I  would  have  simply  spoken  to  Major 
Linton  and  asked  him  to  hurry  up. 

Q.  The  interview  took  place,  as  the  Controller  and  you 
both  state,  in  his  office,  relative  to  other  matters  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  at  that  interview  Gen.  Stewart  was  present.  The 
City  Controller  says  that  he  asked  you  to  be  more  diligent  in 
preparing  your  statements  and  in  paying  your  moneys  into  the 
City  Treasury  prior  to  the  first  day  of  August  of  this  year. 
You  say  that  no  such  words  passed  between  you  at  that  inter- 
view ? 

A.  I  am  positive  that  no  such  interview  took  place,  but  I 
am  positive  that  he  did  communicate  with  Mr.  March,  or  asked 
him  upon  the  subject. 

Q.  He  made  that  bald  statement  I  have  just  given  to  you. 
He  said  that  later  on,  perhaps  in  June,  but  positively  in  July, 
he  communicated  with  your  office  by  telephone  two  or  three 
times,  urging  that  you  should  pay  into  the  City  Treasury  your 
collections  up  to  that  period,  in  order  that  they  might  appear 
.in  his  statement  of  September  1st,  made  to  Councils  annually. 


367 


He  does  not  say  that  he  communicated  with  you  by  letter,  but 
just  in  the  way  I  have  stated  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    I  am  perfectly  satisfied  that  he  communicated 
by  phone. 

Q.  But  not  personally  to  you  in  his  office  ? 
A.  Not  personally  to  me.     It  was  communicated  to  Mr. 
March. 

Q.  That  was  after  May  ? 
A.  I  don't  know. 

Q.  He  said  that  he  communicated  with  two  or  three  of  your 
attaches.  Now^  your  testimony  is  entirely  opposed  on  that 
point  to  the  testimony  of  the  City  Controller  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  NoAV,  after  July  31st  when  The  Press  took  up  this  sub- 
ject we  are  now  investigating  

A.  The  i4th  of  August. 

Q.  I  say  after  the  31st  of  July  the  City  Controller  made  a 
written  demand  upon  you,  as  he  thought  he  had  a  right  under 
the  law  to  make,  for  a  full  statement  of  your  receipts,  and  in 
due  time  that  came.  We  have  it  of  record.  In  that  state- 
ment it  appears  that  during  this  present  year  you  had  collected 
upon  pawnbrokers  licenses  nearly  $8,000 — therabouts  ? 

A.  Less  than  that.  Many,  I  think,  have  paid  since  this 
controversy. 

Q.  None  of  w^hich  had  been  paid  into  the  City  Treasury  as 
required  by  law  as  daily  payments.  With  that  law  you  are 
conversant  ? 

A.  Pretty  fairly  now. 

Q.  You  w  ere  always  conversant  with  it  ? 
A.  I  was  not.    I  found  no  record  in  the  office  of  a  single 
payment — except  in  lump — into  the  City  Treasury. 

Q.  But  you  will  not  gainsay  the  fact  that  the  law  was  there 
when  you  took  your  seat  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    It  was  in  existence,  but  not  enforced. 


368 


Q.  Whose  fault  was  that,  in  your  department  ? 
A.  I  have  nothing  to  say  about  it. 
Q.  Was  it  not  your  fault  ? 
A.  I  am  certainly  responsible. 

Q.  You  are  responsible  for  yourself  and  those  you  appointed 
to  office  ? 

A.  Most  assuredly. 

Q.  So  that  the  first  real  charge  is  practically  admitted, 
although  of  course,  which  is  very  proper  for  you  to  say,  you 
say  that  you  were  not  aware  of  the  existence  of  the  law  at 
the  time.    And  that  is  your  excuse  for  not  carrying  it  out  ? 

A.  And  that  I  am  not  of  the  belief  that  they  are  public 
moneys.    That  is  my  honest  position. 

Q.  Sometime  in  the  spring  Mr.  Shields  has  testified  you 
asked  him  a  question  as  to  whether  these  were  public  moneys, 
and  he  said  not  until  the  pawnbrokers  had  perfected  their 
licenses  by  submitting  their  bonds  and  policies  of  insurance. 
The  testimony  before  the  Committee  is  unanimous,  with  one 
exception,  that  in  January  three-fourths  of  the  pawnbrokers  of 
this  City  had  paid  in  their  money.  Fifty-four  of  them  had 
paid  in  their  money  in  January,  and  out  of  those  fifty-four,  as 
it  was  submitted  to  the  Committee  by  their  evidence,  there 
were  one  or  two  whose  policies  or  bonds  had  been  objected  to. 
Yet  none  of  those  pawnbrokers  procured  their  licenses  in 
January  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  can  only  say  this,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
that  upon  the  22d  or  the  24th,  or  whatever  day  it  was,  the 
return  was  made  to  the  City  Treasury. 

Q.  Of  August? 

A.  Yes,  sir — that  that  covered  each  and  every  pawnbroker 
whose  name  was  brought  to  me  as  having  complied  with  the 
requirements  of  the  law. 

Q,  On  the  20th  of  August  you  paid  $400  into  the  City 
Treasury  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  payment  was  the  completion  of  all  that 
I  could  pass  on  my  desk. 


369 


Q.  How  long  had  those  people  fully  complied  with  the  law  ? 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  that,  except  that  the  licenses 
were  brought  to  my  desk,  when  they  were  reported  to  me  as 
having  complied  with  the  law.  I  have  no  knowledge  whether 
they  were  paid  in  January,  March,  or  July.  No  knowledge 
whatever.    I  kept  no  record  of  the  payments. 

Q.  Your  secretary  has  said  that  he  has  no  record  by  which 
he  can  tell  ? 

A.  Well,  he  has.  He  did  not  testify  as  intelligently  as  he 
could  concerning  the  habits  of  the  office.  He  has  a  book  in 
which  he  enters  the  names  of  the  pawnbrokers,  with  their 
addresses  and  the  w^ard  and  the  date  of  the  payments. 

Q.  He  said  he  had  no  such  book  ? 

A.  He  did  not  understand  you  ;  else  he  was  too  nervous  to 
answer.  He  has  also  a  memorandum  list.  I  directed  it 
should  be  made  out  each  year,  showing  the  people  to  be  noti- 
fied. I  secured  the  reports  from  the  lieutenants  of  police,  and 
transmitted  the  information  to  the  secretary,  giving  him  the 
foundation  for  his  business.  And  he  has  a  license-book  and  a 
bond-book,  which  shows  the  issuance  of  the  licenses  and  a  file 
of  insurance  policies,  which  will  show  by  their  absence  where 
certain  policies  have  not  been  filed ;  but  I  will  say  that  he 
cannot  do  the  work  as  he  said  in  the  time  that  is  asked.  There 
are  references  to  be  made,  and  they  will  take  longer  than  the 
mere  clerical  labor  which  will  have  to  be  done  as  he  stated. 

Q.  But  you  were  present  when  I  asked  your  Secretary  those 
questions  about  his  books  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  and  I  heard  what  he  said,  but  I  did  not  like 
to  interfere. 

Q.  He  is  an  intelligent  man  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  but  he  is  also  a  man  of  nerve,  or  a  man  without 
nerve,  and  he  has  been  very  much  agitated  and  annoyed  for 
some  time,  and  it  has  been  difficult  for  him  to  keep  the  office 
in  such  form  as  I  would  like  him  to  keep  it. 
47 


370 


Q.  Don't  you  remember  that  I  asked  you  how  he  knew 
whom  to  notify  ? 

A.  I  remember  it  well,  and  would  have  liked  to  interfere, 
but  I  had  no  privilege  to  do  so. 

Q.  Now,  Mr.  Dechert  testified,  and  I  will  read  you  his  testi- 
mony, as  follows  : 

"It  is  customary  for  you  to  inquire  from  the  de- 
partments as  to  their  probable  receipts  and  expendi- 
tures for  the  current  year.  You  made  such  an  inquiry 
from  the  Mayor's  Department  in  1886,  and  you  re- 
ceived his  answer? 

A.  I  made  that  inquiry  in  July  of  1885.  It,  of 
course,  must  be  made  in  order  to  get  into  the  statement 
made  by  City  Councils  on  the  first  of  September,  under 
the  provisions  of  the  Act  of  1879. 

Q.  What  was  his  answer  as  to  the  anticipated  receipts 
for  1886  ? 

A.  He  answered  that  the  probable  receipts  would  be 
?8,000. 

Q.  Now^,  we  commenced  in  1886.  When  was  your 
attention  called,  or  when  did  you  call  the  attention  of 
the  Mayor  to  the  necessity  of  paying  the  moneys  that 
he  might  have  ? 

A.  The  first  time  was  in  either  May  or  June. 

Q.  Of  this  year? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  that  was  in  the  interview  in  my  ofiice. 
There  were  a  number  of  bills  that  were  laid  aside  be- 
cause of  some  supposed  irregularity,  and  the  Mayor 
came  up  with  his  clerk,  who  attended  to  that  duty,  to 
give  his  personal  explanation.  We  disposed  of  them 
all  afterwards,  and  I  reminded  the  Mayor,  or  told  him, 
that  I  had  something  further  to  say  that  we  were  in- 
terested in.  I  reminded  him  that  his  payments  in  1885 
were  made  quite  late — some  on  the  last  day  of  the  year, 
near  the  close  of  business,  and  that  it  was  inconvenient 


371 


for  us  in  making  up  our  statements  and  in  keeping 
our  accounts,  and  I  asked  him  to  pay  in  whatever 
moneys  he  had,  as  early  in  the  year  as  he  could. 

Q.  As  early  as  possible  in  the  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  explained  that  our  books  were  closed 
on  the  31st  of  July,  and  that  if  his  return  for  that 
period  was  not  made  he  would  get  no  credit  in  the 
annual  statement  for  fees  actually  paid — that  the  differ- 
ence between  what  was  paid  and  the  $8,000  that  he 
estimated,  would  be  paid,  except  the  probable  receipts 
for  the  remaining  five  months. 

Q.  You  mean  to  refer  to  your  annual  statement,  as 
before,  on  the  1st  of  September  to  Councils  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  he  thanked  me  for  calling  his  attention 
to  it  and  said  it  would  be  attended  to." 

A.  My  understanding  was  that  this  had  been  stated  at  the 
time  I  called  with  the  Chief  of  Police.  Mr.  Dechert  says  it 
was  not.  I  was  positive  that  when  I  called  with  the  Chief 
no  such  statement  was  made.  About  the  time  the  chief  clerk 
called,  I  have  no  recollection  as  to  the  statements  made.  The 
mistake  may  have  come  from  my  having  substituted  the  Chief 
of  Police,  Gen'l  Stewart,  for  the  clerk,  Mr.  March. 

Q.  Well,  I  Avill  read  further  to  you  from  his  testimony : 

"  Q.  That  was  in  May  ? 

"  A.  Either  in  May  or  June. 

"  Q.  Well,  what  was  the  next  thing  ? 

"  A.  I  was  absent  from  the  city  for  one  week,  end- 
ing on  July  19th,  at  the  military  encampment  of  the 
State.  On  my  return  home,  or  on  getting  to  my  office 
on  Monday,  the  19th,  the  energies  of  all  the  clerks  in 
the  office  were  at  once  directed  to  the  preparation  of 
the  annual  statement,  which  involves  a  great  many  cal- 
culations, and  of  course  it  was  very  desirable  to  have 
it  as  accurate  as  possible.  In  getting  from  the  Treas- 
urer a  definite  statement  of  the  amounts  that  the  sev- 


372 


eral  departments  had  actually  paid  in  during  the  year., 
it  appeared  the  Mayor  had  not  paid  in  ajiy  of  the 
moneys  that  he  had  received,  as  I  requested  he  should 
do,  except  $2.50.  There  were  two  full  weeks  in  which 
to  do  this.  Immediately  his  attention  was  called  to 
the  matter  by  telephone.  The  chief  clerk,  I  think,  on 
each  occasion,  sent  the  message  by  telephone,  and  on 
at  least  three  of  those  occasions,  I  was  by  his  side,  and 
the  message  was  communicated  to  me." 
A.  The  .$2.50  for  the  cow  were  not  paid  to  me;  I  have  had 

the  credit  of  paying  it,  but  I  don't  wish  to  rob  other  peoj)le  of 

that  credit. 

Q.  Now,  then,  Mr.  Bosbyshell  testified  as  follows : — 

Q.  The  City  Controller  a  few^  moments  ago  stated 
he  thought  it  was  you  who  called  the  Mayor's  atten- 
tion in  1885  to  the  necessity  of  paying  in  the  moneys 
which  he  had  to  pay.  Have  you  any  recollection  of 
calling  his  attention  to  that  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  was  it,  about  ? 

A.  It  was  preparatory  to  making  up  the  statement 
of  September  1,  1885.  It  was  done  sometime  in  July 
1,  1885. 

Q.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  year  ? 
A.  No;  in  July,  1885. 
Q.  You  are  speaking  now  of  last  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  1885. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  to  the  Mayor,  or  to  whom 
you  were  speaking  ? 

A.  Well,  we  have  in  our  office  a  return  clerk,  and  it 
is  his  business  to  keep  an  account  of  all  the  returns 
made  from  the  various  departments.  He  would  occa- 
sionally report  to  me  that  some  department  was  a  little 
delinquent,  or  that  that  department  has  not  paid  up, 
and  they  ought  to  pay  up  faster.    Then,  verbally,  we 


373 


would  call  the  attention  of  the  clerks  of  that  depart- 
ment to  the  fact  that  the  returns  were  due.  The  same 
thing  was  done  in  regard  to  the  Mayor's  department. 
Mr.  March's  attention  was  called  to  it,  and  he  promised 
that  the  returns  would  be  made.  We  told  him  the  im- 
portance of  having  in  as  much  money  as  possible  on 
the  "Slst  of  July,  so  as  to  make  the  return  to  Councils 
as  favorable  as  it  could  be  made. 

''Q.  This  was  in  July  of  1885  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  I  think  it  was  done  prior  to  that. 

Q.  Later  in  the  year  did  you  call  attention  to  the 
necessity  of  paying  the  money  in  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  Avhether  it  was  done  in  1885  or 
not. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  recollect  any  other  matter  in  con- 
nection with  this  subject  where  you  communicated  with 
the  Mayor's  Department  urging  compliance  with  the 
law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  do.  I  think  it  was  the  third  week  in 
July  that  the  Mayor's  Messenger  was  up  at  the  office ; 
I  told  him  then.  It  was  Captain  Leabourn  ;  he  was 
there  receiving  some  rolls  or  bills,  or  doing  some  busi- 
ness. I  asked  him  if  he  would  not  please  give  the 
Controller's  compliments  to  the  Mayor,  and  say  that  he 
had  probably  forgotten  to  make  his  return  as  he  had 
promised,  and  tell  him  the  importance  of  having  it  in 
before  the  31st  of  July,  so  that  the  statement  would 
show  more  than  $2.50  paid  by  the  Mayor's  Department. 
Captain  Leabourn  afterwards  reported  to  me  before  the 
31st  of  July,  that  he  had  told  it  to  the  Mayor,  and  that 
the  Mayor  had  said  that  he  would  attend  to  it. 

Q.  "Now,  was  there  any  other  communication  on  the 
f?ubject  ? 

A.  "We  had  some  communications  with  him  by  tele- 
phone, or  mth  his  office,  when  it  was  reported  back  that 


374 


the  Mayor  would  attend  to  it.  That  was  the  substance 
of  the  communications  received.  On  the  31st  of  July, 
I  think,  about,  next,  maybe  about  one  o'clock,  I  tele- 
phoned down,  after  consulting  the  Controller,  because 
we  always  kept  him  posted  about  such  things,  tele- 
phoned to  the  Mayor's  office  telling  him  the  returns 
had  not  been  made,  and  that  our  books  would  close  that 
day,  and  that  his  Department  would  show  but  the  pay- 
ment of  $2.50  in  the  City  Treasury,  and  that  we  did 
not  think  it  would  look  very  well.  We  asked  him  if 
he  could  not  fix  it  up.  The  reply  was  that  the  Mayor 
was  just  getting  ready  to  go  to  Atlantic  City,  and  had 
bundled  up  the  papers,  and  would  take  them  along,  and 
make  his  return  immediately  upon  his  return.  My 
recollection  is  that  he  said  he  would  make  a  payment 
immediately  on  his  return  as  of  the  31st  of  July,  so  as 
to  get  in  the  statement." 

Mr.  Bardsley :  I  simply  read  that  testimony  to  you  in  order 
to  show^  you  what  was  said. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Now,  some  of  these  pawnbrokers  who  have  paid  their 
money  in  have  not  received  their  licenses  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  The  moment  they  are  brought  to  me  I  shall 
direct  that  they  be  prepared.  They  liave  not  been  presented 
before  me  yet.  Major  Linton  said  this  morning  that  they 
would  be  ready  in  forty-eight  hours,  but  I  will  say  to  you  that 
I  don't  know  whether  it  will  be  done  in  that  time.  I  will  di- 
rect that  they  be  prepared  and  brought  before  me  without  de- 
lay. But  I  wish  to  say  to  you  that  there  are  some  that  I  don't 
think  I  can  issue. 

Q.  Why? 

A.  For  the  reason  that  the  matter  is  left  under  my  control, 
and  because  the  character  of  the  applicants  is  not  sufficiently 
good. 


375 


Q.  Then  there  are  some  of  the  licenses  you  don't  think  you 
will  issue  ? 
A.  I  fear  so. 

Q.  Because  of  the  character  of  the  applicants  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  notified  them  ? 

A.  I  have  not ;  I  cannot  do  that  until  they  make  their  ap- 
plications to  me  for  a  license. 

Q.  But  they  have  not  made  their  application — filed  their 
bonds  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  believe  not.  I  believe  some  of  them  have  not 
fully  complied  in  that  respect,  and  some  of  them  have  been 
convicted  in  court  of  receiving  stolen  goods. 

Q.  What  does  your  secretary  do  about  such  cases  ? 

A.  He  has  no  knowledge  of  them.  I  don't  delegate  to  him 
the  moral  character  of  the  applicants. 

Q.  He  said  that  he  could  not  tell  how  many  had  filed  their 
bonds  ? 

A.  He  can  tell.  It  may  take  a  little  research,  but  it  is  all 
there.  Of  course  the  entries  are  not  all  in  one  blotter,  but 
they  are  perfect  in  themselves  and  you  or  I,  Mr.  Bardsley, 
could  do  that  work  in  ten  minutes. 

Q.  You  heard  the  testimony  of  the  ofiicers  of  the  Fidelity 
Bank  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not  care  to  hear  it.  It  is  a  statement  un- 
usual to  make  about  a  public  man. 

Q.  The  statement  was  from  their  books  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    1  know  it  is  in  print,  but  I  have  not  read  it. 

Q.  You  stated  a  few  moments  ago  that  you  couldn't  tell 
until  you  got  your  books  back  how  your  account  stood  there  ? 

A.  Not  in  its  entirety. 

Q.  Why  have  you  not  had  the  account  balanced  ? 

A.  Well,  because  they  have  not  had  the  time  to  do  it.  I 
sent  for  the  book  and  they  said  that  they  could  not  give  it  to 
me  for  several  days  yet. 


376 


Q.  My  experience  with  banks  has  been  that  they  will  bal- 
ance your  account  any  day. 

A.  Well,  my  experience  has  not  been  that.  I  have  asked 
them  for  the  book,  but  it  is  in  their  hands  yet.  They  would 
not  balance  it  if  it  was  overdrawn — would  they  ? 

Q.  I  presume  not.  But  as  you  are  not  well  acquainted  with 
your  own  balance,  perhaps  you  will  allow  me  to  inform  you 
that  you  have  several  hundred  dollars  there  to  your  credit. 

A.  I  think  so. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  a  check  book  ? 

A.  I  keep  a  check  book  until  it  is  used  up,  and  then  no 
longer. 

Q.  Do  you  margin  your  checks  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  Don't  you  strike  your  own  balances  ? 

A.  Sometimes  I  do  and  sometimes  I  do  not.  I  strike  them, 
but  not  at  regular  dates. 

Q.  Don't  you  strike  a  balance  on  every  check  that  you  take 
out? 

A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Couldn't  you  tell  from  the  stubs  in  your  check-book 
how  much  you  had  the  right  to  check  out  ? 
A.  Of  course,  by  summing  it  up  I  could. 

Q.  When  you  drew  the  checks  that  were  protested  didn't 
you  know  you  had  no  money  there? 

A.  No,  sir ;  so  far  as  my  judgment  and  knowledge  were 
concerned  I  believed  I  had  a  large  balance  to  my  account. 

Q.  Would  not  your  check-book  have  told  the  story  by  look- 
ing at  it  ? 

A.  Well,  I  am  like  some  other  people,  perhaps,  and  may 
have  a  blank  check  in  my  pocket  and  draw  a  check  without 
putting  it  down  in  the  check-book  at  once. 

Q.  But  you  have  referred  to  a  check  of  $3,500. 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


377 


Q.  Do  YOU  think  that  you  would  have  taken  a  check  out  of 
jour  pocket-book  for  that  sum  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  But  I  had  just  changed  my  book.  I  had  fin- 
ished the  ohi  book  and  had  a  new  one,  and  in  doing  so  I  had 
not  transferred  that  amount. 

Q.  So,  when  you  drew  the  check  for  $3,500,  and  after- 
wards drew  those  other  checks,  you  did  not  know  that  you 
did  not  have  the  money  there,  but  supposed  you  had  ? 

A.  I  was  pretty  certain  I  had. 

Q.  How  could  you  be  certain  without  ascertaining  the  fact  ? 

A.  Well,  I  think  I  have  a  pretty  good  head  for  figures 
generally,  and  I  know  within  two  or  three  hundred  dollars 
where  I  stand  financially,  as  a  rule. 

Q.  When  you  have  a  check  book,  do  you  rely  upon  your 
head  or  upon  the  check  book  ? 
A.  Both. 

Q.  Do  they  always  correspond  ? 
A.  Pretty  nearly. 

Q.  But  they  did  not  agree  on  this  occasion  ? 
A.  No,  unfortunately. 

Q.  And  by  reason  of  that  you  drew  a  check  for  money 
which  you  had  not  on  deposit  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  That  check  was  a  personal  check,  and  wherein 
it  enters  into  this  discussion,  after  the  admission  has  been  made 
that  the  city's  account  was  not  intact,  I  fail  to  recognize.  The 
protests  of  those  two  individual  checks — I  do  not  see  how  they 
enter  into  this  question.  .  I  fail  to  recognize  wherein  the  Com- 
mittee can  go  into  those  accounts — outside  of  any  account  of 
city  moneys.  • 

Q.  If  you  say  that  you  decline  to  be  further  examined  on 
the  subject,  we  will  drop  it? 

A.  No,  sir.    But  I  fail  to  recognize  wherein  the  city  has 
any  interest  in  the  payment  of  the  two  individual  checks. 
48 


378 


Q.  We  have  not  a  particle  of  interest.  But  I  want  to  show 
the  condition  of  that  account. 

A.  Very  welL    But  after  the  admission  ? 

Q.  I  was  trying  too  see  how  it  was  you  came  to  have  no 
money  there  ? 

A.  Very  well. 

Q.  In  pursuance  of  that  thought  I  was  asking  you  about 
your  check  book  to  see  how  you  kept  your  accounts — whether 
they  were  accurately  kept  or  not.  You  admit  that  you  did 
not  keep  your  check  book  acurately,  so  that  on  the  face  of  it 
you  could  not  know  how  much  money  you  had  to  your  credit. 
So  you  checked  against  funds  which  were  not  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  in  reference  to  your  statement  that  you  had 
enough  money  in  your  safe  in  the  office  to  cover  all  your  obli- 
gations to  the  city — I  believe  that  was  your  statement  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Well,  on  any  day  that  you  please  to  name,  how  much 
had  you  ? 

A.  I  had  at  all  times,  at  any  and  all  times,  and  I  had  upon 
the  date  when  I  was  called  upon  for  the  money,  in  the  neigh- 
borhood of  $8,500. 

Q.  What  date  was  that  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  it  to  you  exactly.  I  think  it  was  about 
the  26th  inst. 

Q.  Who  called  for  the  money  ? 

A.  No  person  called  for  it,  but  the  City  Solicitor  advised 
me  to  pay  it  to  the  City  Treasurer. 

Q.  What  date  was  that 

A.  I  think  it  was  the  26th.  I  think  the  return  was  made 
by  me  on  the  27th.  The  opinion  was  received  by  me  the  fol- 
lowing morning. 

Q.  Now,  on  that  date  you  say  you  had  in  your  safe  $8,000  ? 

A.  Over  $8,000. 


379 


Q.  $8,500? 

A.  I  suppose  that. 

Q.  You  have  the  power  to  stop  me  in  this  examination,  and' 
of  course  I  will  be  subject  to  jour  call. 
A.  Certainly. 

Q.  Now,  I  have  explained  to  you  the  necessity  and  import- 
ance of  making  these  facts  clear  beyond  a  question. 
A.  Very  well. 

Q.  How  much  had  you  in  the  safe  on  the  26th  of  August  ?' 
A.  Every  cent,  the  same  as  on  the  28th. 

Q.  How  much  had  you  on  the  25th  of  August  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  you  that.  I  can  say  this,  that  with  the 
exception  of  about  JlOO,  which  I  placed  in  the  safe  on  my 
return,  that  the  bulk  of  it  had  been  there  for  months.  I 
brought  back  with  me  from  my  trip  far  more  money  than  I 
required. 

Q.  So,  on  the  25th  of  August  you  had  about  $8,500. 

A.  From  the  date  of  my  return  to  the  16th  or  17th  of 
August  I  had  in  the  safe  not  less  than  $8,000,  not  much  more, 
except  in  fractions,  than  $8,500.  I  brought  about  $500  back 
in  my  pocket. 

Q.  So  you  had  in  your  safe  $8,500  from  August  16th  tO' 
August  28th  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  had  you  on  August  15  ? 

A.  I  had  in  the  safe  what  I  have  told  you.  Then  I  placed 
in  the  safe  about  $500  in  addition  to  the  amount  that  was 
there  before. 

Q.  Then,  on  August  15th,  you  had  there  about  $8,500  ?  • 
A.  That  was  the  date  I  had  $8,500,  and  from  that  time  on. 

Q.  What  had  you  on  August  14th  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.    I  had  about  $8,500  there,  and  then, 
the  $500  I  put  in  on  my  return. 


380 


Q.  Now,  how  far  back,  counting  from  August  14th,  did  you 
have  f 8,000  in  that  safe  ? 

A.  I  think  since  early  in  the  year. 
Q.  Give  us  any  date  you  please  ? 

A.  I  think  since  the  month  of  January,  '86,  either  that 
amount  or  varying  amounts  from  $5,000  to  that  amount,  and 
sometimes  much  more  than  $8,500. 

Q.  You  had  that  in  the  safe  in  your  office? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  it  consist  of? 
A.  Altogether  in  bank  bills. 
Q.  In  large  notes  ? 

A.  In  large  notes.    I  always  kept  it  in  large  notes. 
Q.  But  you  drew  then  out  of  bank  ? 

A.  Sometimes  out  of  bank,  and  sometimes  not  out  of  bank. 
Q.  Out  of  what  bank  did  you  draw  it  ? 
A.  Sometimes  out  of  the  Fidelity  Bank. 
Q.  On  what  date  was  it  that  you  drew^  out  of  the  Fidelity 
Bank  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say. 
Q.  About  when  ? 

A.  Well,  you  saw  the  checks  and  they  are  marked  W.  B. 
Smith  or  Linton.  There  were  large  amounts  and  I  never 
drew  from  bank,  but  from  other  sources,  sometimes  from  my 
business  and  sometimes  not  from  my  business. 

Q.  What  was  your  object  in  having  in  your  office  as  much 
as  $8,000? 

A.  I  thought  it  was  a  handy  thing  for  the  Mayor  to  have 
— if  it  was  necessary. 

Q.  That  was  your  object  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  to  be  used  for  ? 

A.  In  order  to  meet,  among  others,  any  public  demands, 
:and  others  that  were  not. 


381 


Q.  Will  you  state  some  of  them  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  was  payment  of  money  for  things 
which  I  felt  the  Mayor  should  specially  support.  If  there 
was  any  puhlic  matter,  or  if  I  desired  to  entertain,  I  took  it 
from  there.  If  there  were  any  political  contributions  I  de- 
sired to  make,  I  would  take  them  from  there.  If  there  were 
any  objects  which  I  thought  it  was  onl}^  due  that  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  should  further,  I  took  from  there.  I  used  it 
as  a  reserve  fund  for  public  purposes. 

Q.  Of  course,  you  kept  an  account  of  that  money  ? 
A.  No,  sir.    I  kept  a  memorandum  only  in  my  pocket.  I 
never  kept  a  record  of  the  expenditures. 

Q.  Or  of  where  you  got  the  money  ?  ^ 
A.  No,  sir.    Nor  of  when  I  paid  it  out. 

Q.  To  whom  you  paid  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  kept  no  book  or  account? 
A.  Not  of  that. 

Q.  Where  did  this  money  come  from  ? 
A.  From  various  sources. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  to  the  Committee  where  it  came  from  ? 

A.  Considerable  of  it  came  from  my  own  salary.  I  cashed 
my  warrants  and  placed  them  there.  Then  I  got  returns 
from  my  business  house ;  and  if  that  were  more  than  I  needed, 
I  placed  them  there. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  from  the  furniture  place  ? 
A.  I  mean  from  Smith  &  Russell. 

Q.  You  got  some  of  the  money  from  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  But  Mr.  Russell  has  stated  that  on  one  occasion  you 
borrowed  money  from  him  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  but  very  little,  and  only  for  a  temporary  pur- 
pose— $500. 


382 


Q.  And  in  that  way  you  took  money  from  the  business  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  but  as  a  business  partner.  Of  course,  I  have 
the  right  to  take  my  profit  on  my  investment.  I  claimed  the 
right,  if  I  wanted  $600,  to  take  it  out. 

Q.  But  we  have  been  dealing  in  large  sums? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  you  must  remember  that  this  was  not  the 
work  of  a  day,  or  the  work  of  a  month,  but  the  savings  of  a 
long  period — ever  since  I  have  been  in  the  office. 

Q.  On  the  1st  of  January  how  much  was  in  the  safe  ? 

A.  Possibly  three  or  four  thousand  dollars. 

Q.  And  it  never  got  less  ? 

A.  Not  much  less,  and  sometimes  it  got  much  more.  I  have 
already  explained  that,  but  if  you  want  to  ask  me  about  po- 
litical matters,  Mr.  Bardsley,  ask  me.  I  will  tell  you.  I 
think  that  is  what  you  are  leading  up  to.  I  will  tell  you. 
The  amount  ran  on  in  that  way.  It  was  my  own  money 
placed  in  my  own  hands  for  expenditure. 

Q.  But  it  looks  so  singular  that  a  man  having  $8,500  in 
his  safe  should  allow  his  checks  to  go  to  protest  and  remain 
unpaid  eight  or  ten  days — when  he  had  $8,000  right  in  his 
safe  in  his  office. 

A.  It  does  not  look  singular  if  you  will  state  it  plainly. 

Q.  Only  to  me,  of  course. 

A.  I  told  you  that  the  protests  were  both  whilst  I  was  out 
of  the  city,  and  that  they  wouldn't  have  gone  to  protest  had  I 
known  the  account  was  overdrawn.  / 

Q.  But  then  after  you  came  home  what  did  you  do  ? 

A.  I  was  told  that  they  had  been  offered  and  the  deposits 
had  been  made  by  Major  Linton  to  my  credit,  which  had 
made  everything  correct. 

Q.  Was  that  the  fact  ? 

A.  I  believe  it  was. 

Q.  When  did  he  make  the  deposit  ? 

A.  Mr.  Clay  has  stated  that  the  deposits  were  made  during 
my  absence. 


383 


Q.  Was  that  deposit  made  out  of  moneys  from  the  safe  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  I  left  him  quite  a  large  sum  of  money  out  of 
my  pocket  when  I  left  the  city. 
Q.  It  didn't  come  out  of  the  safe  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  it  was  other  money.  I  have  allowed  the  Major 
to  pay  all  my  accounts — bills  that  would  come  in,  individual 
bills.  He  would  pay  those.  That  is  the  Avay  it  was.  He 
has  done  it  for  years.  It  has  been  done  because  I  had  the 
utmost  confidence  in  him. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  left  him  a  large  sum  of  money  ? 

A.  Yes ;  several  hundreds  of  dollars. 

Q.  Did  it  or  not  come  out  of  the  safe  money  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  keep  no  record  of  w^hat  you  have  in  the  safe  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  have  you  there  this  minute  ? 

A.  I  have  considerable  there ;  but  I  don't  know  that  it  is 
germane  to  the  question.  But  if  you  want  J5,000  for  an  ac- 
commodation, I  will  let  you  have  it.    I  have  it  there. 

Q.  You  have  it  there  now. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  had  it  there  when  you  drew  all  these  checks  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  did  not.  I  had  it  in  my  pocket,  the  greatest 
portion  of  it,  for  some  time. 

Q.  But  you  had  possession  of  this  money  all  these  weeks  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  all  through  this  talk.  But  for  being  driven 
into  the  position  that  I  have  been  placed  in,  there  would  have 
been  no  difficulty.  If  there  had  been  an  official  inquiry  in 
the  beginning,  there  would  have  been  no  difficulty  ;  but  after 
being  hounded  and  harassed,  my  combative  qualities  I  suppose 
became  aroused,  and  I  was  too  plucky  to  surrender  without  a 

fight. 

Q.  But  you  have  surrendered  ? 

A.  I  have  not  surrendered — in  that  sense.  It  was  at  that 
time  "  your  money  or  your  life." 


384 


Q.  But  you  have  paid  the  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  I  have  paid  the  money  ;  but  not  to  the  man  who 
demanded  it.  It  is  not  now  "  Your  money  or  your  life."  It 
is  not  a  surrender  in  that  sense.  It  is  a  submission  to  this 
Committee. 

Q.  Then  it  Avas  your  money  or  your  life  at  first  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  and  no  highwayman  can  say  to  me,  "Your 
money  or  your  life." 

Q.  When  could  the  city  have  got  this  money  ? 
A.  Any  time  that  she  asked  for  it. 

Q.  What  necessity  was  there  that  you  should  be  asked  for 
this  money  ?    You  knew  the  law. 

A.  I  have  already  explained  to  you  a  moment  ago,  that  I 
couldn't  do  it  in  a  certain  way,  but  the  moment  that  I  was 
ofiicially  asked  to  turn  it  over  I  did  so.  I  did  not  want  to  be 
driven  into  occupying  that  position  that  I  should  not  occupy ; 
but  the  moment  there  was  an  official  demand  made  upon  me  I 
responded. 

Q.  Why  was  it  necessary  to  ask  you  at  all  ? 

A.  Because  I  have  said,  in  my  honest  convictions,  which  is 
supported  by  my  counsel,  that  this  money  was  not  mine  in  any 
official  capacity,  and  that  I  was  in  no  wise  responsible  to  the 
city  for  it  but  to  the  individuals.    That  was  my  advice. 

Q.  Now,  briefly,  the  charges  are  that  you  received  money 
from  citizens  paid  on  behalf  of  the  City,  and  put  it  into  your 
own  money,  and  you  have  answered  that  by  saying  it  is 
not  true  ? 

A.  No,  sir, 

Q.  Or  that  they  were  not  public  money  ? 

A.  I  have  said  this,  that  I  did  not  believe  they  were  public 
moneys,  and  that  I  did  not  use  them  as  public  moneys,  and 
that  I  held  myself  responsible  at  any  moment  to  return  them. 

Q.  Well,  the  next  specific  charge  is  that  you  defied  the  law 
which  requires  daily  payments  to  be  made  into  the  City 
Treasury  ?    Your  answer  to  that  is,  that  you  did  not  know 


385 


such  was  the  law,  but  that  when  you  were  officially  advised  of 
the  fact  you  immediately  paid  over  the  money  ? 
A.  That  is  correct  in  the  abstract. 

Q.  Now,  the  next  serious  charge  in  this  connection  is  that 
you  altered  checks,  in  order  that  you  might  convert  the 
amount  of  those  checks  to  your  own  use.  To  that  you  answer 
that  you  did  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  if  there  was  any  alteration  of  checks  it  was 
done  by  your  secretary,  not  by  you,  either  with  your  knowledge 
or  consent  ? 

A.  That  is  correct. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  to  ^Ir.  Bardsley  that  on  the  1st 
of  July  you  had  about  $8,000  in  your  safe  ? 
A.  A  little  over  that. 

Q.  You  had  that  sum  continuously  in  your  safe  until  the 
time  the  demand  was  made  upon  you,  when  you  turned  the 
money  into  the  City  Treasury  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  when  you  went  away  you  left  that  money  in 
the  custody  of  Major  Linton  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  he  never  had  access  to  that  safe  in  his  life.  I 
left  six  or  seven  hundred  dollars  in  cash  with  him — individual 
money — cash  from  my  pocket  to  meet  bills  that  might  be  pre- 
sented in  my  absence. 

Q.  Did  you  furnish  him  any  other  money  during  your 
absence  ? 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  And  he  made  all  your  deposits  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  he  made  the  most  of  my  deposits  and  had  full 
charge  of  all  deposits  where  any  city  money  was  concerned. 
49 


386 


Q.  Did  he  make  deposits  for  you  during  July,  or  which  one 
of  your  officials  did  that  ? 

A.  As  a  general  rule  I  entrusted  that  matter  to  the  Major, 
unless  my  brother  was  near,  otherwise  I  generally  called  in 
the  Major  because  he  had  less  to  do  in  my  estimation  and  was 
more  trustworthy.  He  was  always  my  private  factotum  in  the 
office  and  collected  my  bills  and  paid  my  bills.  He  has  always 
had  absolute  command  of  my  individual  money. 

Q.  You  say  you  had  the  sum  of  $8,000  in  that  safe  with 
which  you  could  have  made  good  this  money  at  that  time,  or 
at  any  time  when  you  felt  it  was  obligatory  to  you  to  pay  it 
over  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir, 

Q.  During  your  absence  from  the  city,  were  there  any 
other  sources  from  which  you  could  have  gotten  money  except 
from  the  safe  ? 

A.  For  what  purpose  ? 

Q.  To  deposit  or  have  Major  Linton  deposit. 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  any  other  sources.  I  have  never 
allowed  anybody  to  make  a  deposit  without  informing  me  of 
the  fact. 

Q.  You  left  the  city  on  the  fifth  and  returned  on  the  six- 
teenth ? 
A.  Well? 

Q.  During  that  time  there  was  in  that  safe  $8,000  by  which 
he  could  have  make  good  any  demands  of  the  city  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  would  not  have  allowed  him  to  do  that,  or 
anybody.    That  would  have  been  a  personal  matter. 

Q.  In  that  time  you  made  no  deposits  yourself? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  make  any  for  you  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  positively. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  was  any  other  person  who  did  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 


387 


Q.  Do  you  think  of  any  other  person  ? 

A.  No  ;  I  have  never  been  annoyed  by  anybody  wanting  to 
make  deposits  for  me. 

Q.  Now,  on  the  sixth  of  July  you  were  away  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  was  in  the  city.  I  left  on  the  morning  of  the 
seventh. 

Q.  And  you  returned  on  the  fifteenth  ? 
A.  On  the  fifteenth  or  the  sixteenth. 

Q.  State  who  it  was  who  was  kind  enough  to  deposit  for 
you  on  the  seventh,  the  sum  of  $1,907.62  ?  Where  did  it 
come  from  ? 

A.  It  is  very  likely  Major  Linton  can  tell.  He  had  my 
bank  book. 

Q.  How  could  he  deposit  it  with  the  $600  which  you  left? 

A.  I  say  that  I  have  no  knowlege  of  what  he  did  deposit, 
or  could  deposit.  He  may  have  deposited  at  that  time  moneys 
that  I  have  no  knowledge  of.  If  there  were  checks  he  could 
not  have  deposited  them  because  there  could  have  been  no  en- 
dorsement. 

Q.  You  say  you  had  $8,000  in  your  safe.  Where  had  you 
any  other  money  ? 

A.  I  had  no  other  money  ready  that  could  reach  me. 

Q.  Yet  $1,907  were  deposited  to  your  credit. 
A.  Very  well. 

Q.  And  $120  on  the  12th  of  the  month  ? 
A.  That  Major  Linton  deposited  because  they  had  notified 
me  that  my  account  was  short. 

Q.  He  did  not  take  that  out  of  the  safe  ? 
A.  He  never  was  in  the  safe  in  his  life. ,  He  does  not  have 
the  combination  of  it.  His  safe  is  entirely  distinct  from  mine. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  placed  in  the  hands  of 
Major  Linton  a  blank  check  book,  with  full  privilege  to  draw 
upon  your  account  ? 

A.  He  never  drew  a  check  in  his  life. 


388 


Q.  Where  did  the  money  come  from  ? 

A.  I  permitted  him  to  deposit,  but  although  I  was  not 
afraid,  he  never  drew  a  check  in  his  life. 

Q.  You  were  absent  from  the  6th  of  July  until  the  16th  of 
July,  and  you  say  that  you  had  J8,000  securely  in  your  safe, 
and  that  $600  were  left  with  Major  Linton-  Now,  there  was 
a  deposit  in  addition  to  the  sums  I  have  already  mentioned  to 
you  of  $2,635.50  on  the  14th  of  July  ;  where  did  that  come 
from  ? 

A.  I  don't  know,  sir. 

Q.  There  is  a  deposit  of  nearly  $5,000  during  the  time  you 
w^ere  gone  and  you  don't  know  where  it  came  from  ? 

A,  I  would  know  by  looking,  but  I  don't  know  now:  I 
have  not  looked  at  the  account ;  my  book  is  yet  in  bank. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  But  you  have  the  stubbs  in  your  check  book  ? 
A.  They  will  not  show  the  deposits. 

Q.  Don't  you  write  down  the  deposits  on  the  stubbs  ? 
A.  I  do  not.    I  write  down  what  I  draw  in  one  book,  and 
what  I  put  in  in  another. 

Q.  Then,  you  don't  write  on  the  stub  of  the  check  book 
whatever  you  put  in  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  that  is  where  the  error  came.  If  I  had  done 
that  there  would  have  been  no  error.  I  can  show  you  the 
check  book,  but  it  can  give  you  no  information  upon  that 
point. 

Q.  Then,  you  have  nothing  to  show  where  the  $2,600  'came 
from  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Will  Major  Linton  know  ? 
A.  I  presume  so. 

Mr.  Bardsley:  Well,  I  think  he  had  better  be  advised  to  go 
and  find  out. 


389 


Mayor  Smith  (the  witness)  :  I  will  tell  him  to  do  so. 

(Mayor  Smith  here  hands  to  Major  Linton,  who  is  present 
in  the  room,  a  memorandum  and  gives  him  some  verbal  orders.) 

Ey  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  You  heard  the  testimony  of  Major  Linton  this  morning  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Y"ou  heard  him  tell  about  all  the  money  that  he  received 
from  pawnbrokers'  licenses,  and  that  he  w^ould  take  it  to  you 
in  cash,  or  in  checks,  and  if  it  was  in  checks  that  you  would 
endorse  them,  and  that  then  the  money  would  be  deposited  to 
the  credit  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  in  the  Fidelity 
Trust  Company  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  According  to  the  testimony  submitted  to  us  by  the  Con- 
troller it  appears  that,  in  the  month  of  January,  $5,400  were 
received  from  that  source,  all  of  which  the  Major  testified  he 
turned  into  bank. 

A.  I  believe  de  did.  Every  cent  he  banked  I  believe  was 
every  cent  that  he  received. 

Q.  How  much  money  in  cash  did  you  tell  Mr.  Bardsley  you 
had  on  hand  at  that  time — about  the  1st  of  January,  last — 
$8,000  ? 

A.  I  think  I  said  about  $5,000.  That  w^as  my  recollection. 
That  is  about  the  lowest  sum  I  had. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  at  all  times  suffi- 
cient money  in  your  safe  to  make  good  any  amount  due  the 
city? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not  say  that.  I  don't  desire  to  be  mis- 
placed or  misconstrued.  I  said,  and  I  say,  that  neither  then 
nor  at  any  time  was  I  unable  from  my  individual  resources  to 
account  for  every  cent  of  public  money  that  could  be  demanded 
from  me.  I  am  not  going  to  say  that  it  was  always  in  the 
safe,  or  in  my  pocket.  But  I  say  that  it  was  absolutely  at  my 
command  whenever  I'could  be  called  upon,  to  account  for  every 


390 


cent  I  received.  It  makes  no  difference  whether  it  was  in 
bank  or  in  the  safe — if  I  was  bound  to  pay  it.  I  cannot  say 
more  than  that.  I  think  you  will  find  several  thousands  to 
my  credit  in  January,  1886. 

Q.  I  find  that  your  credits  vary.  There  was  never  so  much 
in  the  bank  except  on  one  or  two  occasions  as  Major  Linton 
testisfied  he  deposited.  I  have  gone  down  the  balance  and 
taking  the  month  I  find  that  the  highest  balance  to  your  credit 
at  any  one  time  was  $1,864.43.  In  the  month  of  February 
it  never  exceeded  $1,900.  In  the  month  of  March  the  high- 
est credit  was  $7,301.10,  at  which  it  remained  several  days 
when  it  was  reduced  to  $286.  In  May  the  highest  balance 
was  $792,  at  any  one  time.  In  June  the  highest  balance  was 
$3,000.  On  the  sixth  of  July  it  is  $8,000.  Now  if  the  tes- 
timony of  Major  Linton  is  correct,  in  January  you  had  $5,400, 
which  you  claim  to  have  held  as  the  agent  for  the  pawnbrokers, 
all  of  which.  Major  Linton  says  was  deposited  in  the  Fidelity. 
In  February  there  were  $500  additional ;  in  March  $300 
more;  in  April  $300  more;  in  May  $200  more;  in  June 
$300  more;  in  July  $100  more,  and  on  the  17th  of  August 
$100  more.  Now,  if  we  are  to  accept  the  testimony  of  Major 
Linton,  which  is  to  the  effect  that  this  was  money  received 
from  pawnbrokers  and  deposited  as  you  would  have  us  believe, 
to  your  credit,  as  the  agent  of  the  pawnbrokers — not  being 
city  money — what  money  had  you,  if  any,  from  pawnbrokers 
to  draw  against  if  the  demand  was  made  ? 

A.  None.  I  never  supposed  it  to  be  city  money,  but  that 
I  owed  individual  obligations  to  them. 

Q.  You  said  to  the  Committee  that  the  feeling  and  believ- 
ing that  you  were  acting  in  the  capacity  of  agent  for  the 
pawnbrokers,  you  drew  against  that  money  deposited  in  order 
that  you  might  distinguish  it  as  theirs  ? 

A.  I  did  not  order  it  to  be  so  deposited  to  distinguish  it  as 
theirs,  but  simply  as  a  matter  of  convenience  and  safety — for 
no  other  reason. 


391 


Q.  But  you  drew  against  that  account  without  any  authority 
from  those  for  whom  you  were  the  agent  ? 
A.  I  certainly  did. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that  that  money — the  $8,000  was  in 
the  safe  every  day  ?  How  do  you  know  it  was  there  ?  Did 
you  count  it  ? 

A.  I  always  kept  the  money  in  bulk  in  one  thousand  dol- 
lars or  two  thousand  dollars,  and  the  packages  were  strapped 
and  marked.  I  know  it  was  there.  I  know  it,  because  I  saw 
it  there. 

Q.  HoAV  many  times  had  you  counted  it  ? 
A.  I  was  in  the  habit  of  counting  it  myself.    Mr.  Fell,  I 
always  had  to  count  it  after  my  own  rough  count. 

Q.  Then  you  say  it  was  there,  but  not  from  seeing  it  there 
every  day  ? 

A.  On  some  days  I  did  not  look  at  it.  But  I  know  I  had 
the  combination  of  the  safe  and  that  nobody  could  get  into  it. 
I  knew  it  to  be  safe. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  You  were  indebted  to  the  city  some  nine  or  ten  thousand 
dollars  ? 

A.  I  never  was.  I  beg  your  pardon.  I  have  no  desire  to 
assume  the  payment  of  the  $10,000  in  full.  Mr.  March  rep- 
resents $2,000  and  Major  Linton  represents  $870,  I  think, 
for  amusement  licenses,  etc.  Individually,  my  account  is  the 
pawnbrokers'  account,  and  that  amounts  to  $8,000,  and  I 
think  that  upon  the  last  day  the  return  was  made  six  or  seven 
payments  were  made  by  pawnbrokers — upon  the  last  day  of 
the  return. 

Q.  You  are  aware,  as  between  yourself  and  the  city,  you  do 
owe  the  entire  amount  r 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  I  say  that  those  other  men  should  have 
their  share.  I  was  not  indebted  for  Mr.  March  s  money,  un- 
der the  contract. 


392 


Q.  You  were  responsible  for  it  ? 

A.  I  was  not — under  the  contract.  The  city  designated  an 
officer  of  the  department,  and  that  officer  Avas  certainly  ac- 
countable, being  designated  under  the  contract. 

Q.  But  you  were  accountable  to  the  city  ? 

A.  The  ordinance  does  not  say  so.  The  ordinance  says 
that  the  Mayor  shall  delegate  a  person  who  shall  be  responsible. 

Q.  Then  you  think  that  in  case  of  an  officer  making  default 
it  w^ould  not  be  your  fault  ? 

A.  Not  my  fault.  I  might  possibly  have  to  make  it  good; 
but  here  is  the  case  of  an  officer  who  handles  from  $90,000  to 
$115,000  a  month.  He  gives  no  bond.  Possibly  a  bond 
should  have  been  exacted  from  my  Chief  Clerk  ;  he  handles 
that  amount  of  money  per  month.  Clerks  all  through  the 
city,  w^ho  do  not  ^handle,  one-third  of  that  amount  of  money, 
are  under  large  bonds,  but  in  the  Mayor's  office  no  bond  is  in 
existence. 

Q.  For  all  the  receipts  in  your  office  you  are  responsible, 
are  you  not  ?  But  I  am  informed  that  for  the  money  for  the 
redemption  of  dogs  you  are  not  responsible  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  that  if  you  will  read  the  ordinance  and 
the  contract  you  will  think  I  am  at  all  responsible ;  it  is  an 
old  contract  which  has  been  continued  from  year  to  year. 

Q.  Suppose  you  had  died  while  that  money  was  in  the  safe, 
and  you  had  been  largely  indebted  to  the  city  ? 

A.  Well,  I  am  like  a  great  many  people,  unfortunate  in 
beins:  insured :  and  I  am  afraid  that  I  would  be  worth  more 
dead  than  alive. 

Q.  But  how  about  the  city  ? 

A.  There  is  plenty  for  the  city  outside  of  that. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  It  was  in  your  power  to  exact  security  from  your  clerks  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  but  in  the  office  nothing  could  be  done  without 
absolute  sheer  robbery,  because  the  warrants  are  all  drawn  to 
individuals. 


393 


By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  How  about  this  money  for  redemption  of  dogs  ? 
A.  There  seems  to  be  no  redemption  for  dogs  ? 

Q.  You  are  not  responsible  for  it  ? 

A.  No  ;  but  I  assume  all  the  responsibility.  The  contract 
does  seem  to  be  in  a  shape  which  does  not  make  me  respon- 
sible.   That  is  the  view  of  the  attorneys. 

Q.  Have  you  had  occasion  recently  to  go  outside  of  your 
usual  sources  of  work  to  raise  any  money  ? 
A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  Have  you  created  any  mortgages  ? 

A.  No ;  I  am  unfortunate  in  having  only  one  property  in 
the  Twenty-eighth  Ward  and  one  in  the  Third  Ward.  They 
are  both  clear. 

Q.  They  are  free  from  all  incumbrances  ? 

A.  They  are.    I  don't  owe  one  cent  upon  them. 

Q.  Is  there  nothing  against  either  of  them. 

A.  I  have  nothing — no  judgment  nor  anything  against  me. 

Q.  Mortgages  or  ground  rents  ? 

A.  Nothing  of  the  kind.  Yes.  On  my  property  in  the 
Twenty-eighth  Ward  there  is  a  ground  rent.  The  property 
only  is  mine.  The  ground  rent  I  never  purchased.  It  be- 
longs to  a  member  of  the  Chamber. 

Q.  I  thought  that  you  said  that  your  properties  in  the 
Twenty-eighth  Ward  and  Third  Ward  were  entirely  clear  ? 

A.  So  they  are ;  but  I  only  bought  the  domicile  and  not 
the  ground  rent  in  the  Twenty-eighth  Ward,  because  the  gen- 
tleman wished  to  retain  the  ground  rent. 

Q.  Don't  you  know  that  a  ground  rent  on  a  piece  of  land 
covers  whatever  is  on  it  ? 

A.  Well,  I  am  not  at  all  afraid  of  my  investment  in  the 
Twenty-eighth  Ward. 
50 


394 


Q.  So  that  you  think  your  house  is  clear  in  the  Twenty- 
eighth  Ward  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  pretty  clear  just  now. 

Q.  With  the  ground  rent  against  it  ? 

A.  I  have  already  corrected  my  statement  by  saying  that  I 
had  only  purchased  the  property  and  not  the  ground  rent. 

Q.  Then  it  is  subject  to  a  ground  rent  ? 

A.  Yes.  But  as  I  have  it,  it  is  in  its  original  state.  I 
will  now  hand  over  to  the  Committee,  if  they  desire  to  have 
it,  the  tabulated  statement,  showing  the  receipts  for  various 
years,  to  which  I  referred  in  the  first  part  of  my  evidence, 
and  the  Committee  can  have  it  placed  in  their  record. 

(Mayor  Smith  here  presented  the  following  paper) : 


395 


00 

CO 

1 

i> 

4 

Ci 

lO 

CO 

j> 

CO 

00 

CO 

o 

to 

o 

CO 

00 

o 

> 

ctT 

oT 

cT 

oo" 

oo" 

oT 

3" 

H 

€^ 

te 
3 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

O 

a> 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

S 

o 

to 

o 

o 

o 

00 

00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

o 

Mi 

CO 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

a 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

00 

00 

u 

to 

tl 

"£ 

Ph 

CO 

o 

lO 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

lO 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

to 

00 

r- 

00 

to 

o 

lO 

C5 

CO 

oo 

o 

o 

o 

OS 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

lO 

o 

lO 

lO 

lO 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

oo 

lO 

lO 

»o 

uo 

lO 

o 

lO 

CO 

CO 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

lO 

o 

lO 

o 

o 

lO 

o 

to 

to 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

(M 

o     o  o 

o     o  o 

TtH^ 

co"   co"  i>r 


o  o 
o  o 

i>r  to 


o  o 
o  o 


CO  05 

00  oo 


O  rH 

00  oo 
CO  CO 


396 


William  F.  Fell,  being  dalj  sworn,  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  The  Mayor's  Inspection  Clerk. 

Q.  Have  you  the  combination  of  this  safe  of  the  Mayor's  ? 
A.  I  have. 

Q.  Does  any  one  else  have  the  combination? 

A.  No  one  but  myself  and  the  Mayor.  That  was  my  dis- 
tinct understanding  at  the  time  I  took  the  combination  that  no 
one  else  should  have  it. 

Q.  When  did  you  take  it  ? 

A.  At  the  time  the  safe  was  purchased,  shortly  after  he 
.came  into  office,  or  was  inaugurated. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  this  money  in  the  safe  ? 

A.  In  a  general  way  I  can  say  that  there  are  always  large 
sums  of  money  in  the  safe.  The  Mayor  frequently  hands  to 
me  large  sums  of  money  done  up  in  packages  which  I  place  in 
the  safe  subject  to  his  order  of  removal, 

Q.  How  much  is  there  now  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.    I  simply  take  what  he  gives  me. 
Q.  Do  you  count  it  ? 

A.  Sometimes  I  verify  it  when  he  has  no  time,  and  some- 
times he  will  verify  the  account  with  me.  Then  I  place  it  in 
the  safe.  At  other  times  he  will  verify  it  and  give  it  to  me 
in  packages  which  I  put  in  the  safe. 

Q.  How  much  ^have  you  ever  been  called  on  to  verify  ? 
What  has  been  the  largest  amount  ? 

A.  The  largest  amount  that  I  suppose  I  ever  had  there  was 
.^15,000  or  $20,000  in  the  safe. 

Q.  In  what  shape  was  it  ? 

A.  Principally  in  notes. 


397 


Q.  Of  what  denominations  ? 

A.  Mostly  large,  but  sometimes  fives,  tens,  and  twenties^ 
and  sometimes  larger. 

Q.  It  would  take  a  good  many  of  tliem  to  make  $15,000  or 
$20,000. 

A.  When  he  had  that  much  money  there — that  occasion 
was  one  time ;  when  he  had  that  much. 

Q.  In  the  other  instances  how^  was  the  money  ? 
A.  Sometimes  it  was  in  notes  of  large  denomination,  and  at 
other  times  in  fives,  tens,  etc. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Where  did  that  money  come  from  ? 
A.  I  received  it  from  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  it  came  from  ? 
A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  What  are  your  duties  there  in  that  ofiice  ? 

A.  They  are  to  make  all  the  appointments.  The  Mayor 
furnishes  me  with  a  list  of  the  appointments  and  I  have  the 
applicants  to  go  through  the  form  of  sending  them  to  the  Police 
Surgeon,  and  after  he  reports  to  the  Mayor  their  names  are 
handed  to  me,  and  if  the  applicants  are  appointed  I  receive  the 
lists  from  the  Mayor,  and  send  for  the  applicants  and  they  fill 
up  the  blanks,  and  I  swear  them  in  and  furnish  the  clerk  of 
the  Chief  of  Police  with  a  memorandum  of  the  appointments. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  else  you  do  ? 

A.  I  also  inspect  the  repairs  to  the  station-houses  throughout 
the  department.  Any  repairs  needed  are  reported  through  the 
Chief  of  Police,  and  sometimes  to  myself.  I  go  and  look  after 
the  repairs  and  report  personally  to  the  Mayor,  and  if  he 
orders  them  I  then  order  the  repairs. 

Q.  What  other  business  have  you  ? 

A.  Well,  my  duties  are  numerous — whatever  the  Mayor 
directs. 


398 


Q.  I  understand  that  you  are  under  the  directions  of  the 
Mayor.    Can  you  tell  us  anything  else  you  do. 

A.  Well,  last  year  the  entire  construction  of  the  patrol 
houses  was  under  my  personal  supervision — everthing  done  in 
the  construction  of  the  houses  was  under  me. 

Q.  You  say  the  alteration  and  construction  of  the  patrol 
houses  ? 

A.  Everything  connected  with  the  construction  of  the 
houses,  and  the  equipment  of  the  houses  was  done  under  my 
directions. 

Q.  Have  you  done  much  of  that  kind  of  work  this  year  ? 
A.  Up  to  the  first  of  last  May. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  this  direction  this  year  up  to  the  first 
of  May? 

A.  We  finished  up  No.  5  Patrol  House,  Juniper  and  San- 
som  streets,  about  the  first  of  the  year.  We  then  started  in 
with  the  alteration  and  improvement  of  Twenty-fifth  Police 
District.  I  obtained  the  bids  and  looked  after  that  work  there. 

Q.  How  often  did  you  go  there  ? 

A.  I  went  there  some  three  or  four  times  a  week. 

Q.  It  is  in  testimony  that  a  patrolman  was  placed  in  charge 
of  those  alterations  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Under  you  ? 

A.  Under  the  direction  of  the  Mayor,  his  brother,  Mr.  John 
F.  Smith,  was  placed  there  to  be  continuously  there  and  see 
that  everything  was  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the  con- 
tracts, and  if  anything  went  wrong  or  was  not  carried  out  in 
accordance  with  the  contracts,  he  was  to  report  to  me  and  I 
report  to  the  Mayor. 

Q.  Do  you  keep  any  record  of  the  money  in  that  safe  ? 

A.  I  have  no  necessity  to  do  it.  I  simply  take  it  as  the 
custodian  and  place  it  in  the  safe  upon  the  orders  of  the 
Mayor.    I  simply  take  it  in  packages. 


/ 


399 

Q.  What  kind  of  a  custodian  were  you,  then  ? 
A.  I  took  the  packages. 
Q.  Yoii  do  not  know  how  much  there  was  ? 
A.  I  don't  know.    I  took  it  from  the  Mayor  just  as  he  gave 
it  to  me  from  time  to  time. 
Q.  And  then  counted  it  ? 

A.  I  did  not  always.    Sometimes  I  counted  it  with  him, 
and  sometimes  he  would  hand  it  to  me  to  count. 
Q.  Then  you  counted  it  and  put  it  in  the  safe  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  for  that  reason  that  I  asked  you  how  much  is  there 
now  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say. 
Q.  About  how  much  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say.  I  take  it  as  it  is  given  to  me.  I  never 
touch  the  money  unless  he  tells  me  to  give  him  a  certain 
amount  of  the  money. 

Q.  You  count  it  when  you  put  it  in  ? 

A.  Sometimes  I  do. 

Q.  And  sometimes  you  count  with  him  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  you  know  because,  at  any  rate,  it  is  counted  in  your 
presence  ? 

A.  Not  always. 

Q.  Are  there  $10,000  there  to-day  ? 
A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  Give  us  the  amount,  to  the  best  of  your  judgment.  You 
handled  this  money — you  are  its  custodian. 

A.  I  say  that  I  take  the  money  from  the  Mayor,  from  time 
to  time,  and  place  it  in  the  safe.  At  other  times  I  go  to  the 
safe  and  I  find  money  in  the  safe,  which,  from  the  bulk  of  it, 
I  know  has  increased  since  I  was  there  before,  and  then  I 
have  frequently  said  to  the  Mayor,  "  Did  you  place  money  in 
the  safe?"  and  he  of  course  has  said  "Yes." 


400 


Q.  What  was  the  last  day  that  you  put  any  money  in  the 
safe,  yourself  or  with  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  I  put  money  in  the  safe  to-day.  • 

Q.  How  much  ? 

A.  About  $128. 

Q.  How  much  yesterday  ? 

A.  About  $108. 

Q.  Was  that  money  receipts  in  the  office  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  private  moneys  ? 

A.  It  was  not  from  the  receipts  of  the  office — not  city 
money. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  put  in  the  day  before  ? 
A.  Nothing. 

Q.  When  did  you  receive  any  large  sum  of  money — 
$15,000  or  $20,000  ?    When  did  you  have  that  much  there  ? 
A.  Not  recently. 

Q.  About  when  ? 
A.  I  could  not  say. 

Q.  How  is  it  you  know  there  was  that  large  amount  of 
money— $15,000  or  $20,000  ? 

A.  I  understood  the  question  put  to  me  to  be,  how  much 
money  was  in  the  safe  at  different  times  ?  and  I  answered  that 
at  different  times  I  had  that  much  money  there. 

Q.  At  one  time  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  at  one  time. 

Q.  About  when  ? 
A.  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  A  year  ago  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  inside  of  a  year. 
Q.  And  was  it  last  August  ? 

A.  I  won't  pretend  to  come  down  to  the  month,  or  the 
time. 


401 


Q.  But  come  down  to  three  months  ? 

A.  All  I  say  is  that  I  know  there  have  been  large  sums  of 
money  in  the  safe  within  three  months. 

Q.  Within  three  months  of  to-day  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  was  there  ? 
A.  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Fifteen  thousand  dollars  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.    It  was  placed  there  by  the  Mayor. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  place  a  large  amount  of  money  there 
in  bundles  ? 

A.  Not  for  some  time. 

Q.  How  long  is  that  ? 

A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  in  six  months. 

Q.  Then,  how  large  a  sum  did  you  place  there  ? 
A.  I  do  not  remember. 

Q.  You  said  a  large  sum.    How  much  is  a  large  sum  ? 

A.  I  say  that  I  am  at  different  times  receiving  large  amounts 
of  money.  Sometimes  I  count  it  myself,  and  sometimes  he 
puts  it  in  there.  I  am  not  supposed  to  know  what  he  puts  in 
there,  and  I  make  it  a  rule  never  to  touch  the  money  unless 
he  tells  me  to. 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  about  three  months  ago  you  put  a 
large  sum  in  there  ? 

A.  I  did  say  I  did  it,    I  knew  it  was  in  there. 

Q.  How  much  is  a  large  sum  ? 

A.  It  depends  altogether  on  what  you  call  a  large  sum. 
Q.  What  do  you  call  a  large  sum  ? 
A.  I  would  call  $5,000  a  large  sum. 

Q.  Then,  three  months  ago  there  was  as  large  a  sum  as 
$5,000  there? 

A.  I  do  not  know.    I  did  not  place  it  there  myself. 
51 


402 

Q.  But  you  state  a  large  sum  was  there. 
A.  I  said  a  large  sum  was  $5,000.    I  did  not  say  that  I 
placed  $5,000  there. 

Q.  But  you  said  there  was  a  large  sum  there  three  months 
ago? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  I  asked  you  what  a  large  sum  was,  and  you 
said  $5,000.  So,  according  to  that,  there  were  about  $5,000 
there  three  months  ago  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Any  more  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Was  there  that  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  The  Committee  only  wants  you  to  tell  what  was  there. 

A.  I  can  only  tell  to  the  Committee  what  I  know  about  the 
money,  and  I  have  stated  to  the  Committee  exactly  what  I 
know  about  it,  and  I  think  I  have  stated  it  intelligently. 

Q.  We  may  be  the  judges  about  that.  It  is  in  order  to 
corroborate  the  Mayor's  statement,  that  he  has  brought  you 
here  for  that  special  and  particular  purpose.  Now,  you  don't 
corroborate,  because  you  won't  come  specifically  to  anything. 

Mayor  Smith : 

If  the  Committee  will  permit  me  I  will  say  that  I  brought 
Mr.  Fell  here  only  to  corroborate  the  fact  that  I  took  money 
out  of  the  safe  to  deposit  it — not  for  any  other  purpose. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  :  ^ 
Q.  When  was  that  ? 

A.  On  the  date  it  was  last  deposited  in  the  Fidelity  ? 
Q.  That  was  $5,300? 
A.  I  think  it  was  $6,070. 


403 


Q.  That  was  on  the  24th  of  August  ?  You  say  that  the 
Mayor  took  it  out  of  the  safe  on  that  day  ? 

A.  I  was  called  in  the  office,  as  I  frequently  am,  and  was 
told  to  open  the  safe.  The  Mayor  went  to  the  safe  and  shortly 
afterwards  he  told  me  to  take  the  money  and  deposit  it,  which 
I  did. 

Q.  How  much  money  did  he  tell  you  to  takeout  of  the  safe 
and  deposit  ? 

A.  I  did  not  take  it  out.    He  took  it  out. 

Q.  I  thought  you  said  that  he  told  you  to  take  it  out  ? 

A.  No ;  only  to  open  the  safe. 

Q.  How  much  did  he  take  out  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.    He  shortly  afterwards  gave  me  the 
book  and  the  money  to  deposit.    I  think  it  was  $6,070. 
Q.  He  took  that  out,  did  he  ? 

A.  He  made  out  the  account  for  the  Fidelity.  Have  you 
a  statement  of  having  the  $6,070  deposited? 

Q.  I  believe  it  was  somewhere  that.  Did  he  take  that 
money  out? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  left  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    There  is  always  money  in  that  safe. 

Q.  How  much  was  left  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  did  not  count  it.  It  is  his  money 
entirely.  I  simply  put  in  what  he  tells  me  to,  and  take  out 
what  he  tells  me  to. 

Q.  You  do  not  keep  a  record  of  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir.    I  have  no  need  to.    It  is  his  money. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  From  what  source  did  you  receive  that  money,  when  you 
say  you  put  large  sums  in  ? 
A.  I  got  it  from  the  Mayor. 
Q.  Do  you  collect  any  fees  due  the  city  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


404 


Q.  None  at  all  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  count  the  money  in  the  safe  ? 

A.  I  never  count  all  the  money  in  the  safe.  It  is  only  when 
he  directs  me  about  a  certain  sum. 

Q.  During  the  Mayor's  absence  from  the  city — from  the  6th 
to  the  16th  of  July — did  you  open  the  safe? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  open  it  when  I  have  to  go  there  for  any 
reason  whatever. 

Q.  Was  there  money  there  then  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  mucn  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  take  the  money  as  I  receive  it  from 
the  Mayor. 

Q.  The  Mayor  has  said  to  the  Committee  that  he  has  had 
continuously  in  the  safe  a  sum  not  less  than  $8,000,  much 
more  than  enough  to  make  good  any  amount  of  money  that 
could  be  adjudged  due  by  him  to  the  city.  Now,  you  are 
brought  here  for  the  purpose  of  corroborating  that  statement 
— that  that  money  was  in  that  safe,  and  that  you  saw  it  taken 
out. 

Mr  White  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor) : 

Who  said  that  he  was  brought  here  for  that  purpose  ? 

Mr.  Clay : 

The  Mayor  said  that. 

Mayor  Smith : 

I  want  to  say  that  Mr.  Fell  can  testify  only  to  this  fact,  that 
upon  the  date  the  large  deposit  which  you  have  mentioned  was 
made,  six  thousand  and  odd  dollars,  he,  at  my  request,  carried 
the  money  which  I  took  out  of  the  safe  and  deposited  in  the 
Fidelity.  He  was  called  to  prove  that.  In  order  to  prove  that 
I  did  not  shin  around  the  street,  or  run  around  begging  for 
the  money. 


405 


Mr.  White  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor)  : 

There  is  no  objection  to  the  Committee  asking  the  witness 
any  questions.  My  own  judgment  was,  so  far  as  it  went? 
to  your  misrepresenting  what  the  Mayor  had  said. 

Mr.  Clay. 

Very  well ;  the  Mayor  has  made  his  statement  about  it  and 
I  accept  that. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Did  you  see  this  money  placed  in  the  safe  which  was 
taken  out  for  deposit  ? 

A.  I  think  I  have  made  that  very  clear. 

Q.  Did  you  see  that  money  placed  in  the  safe  which  you 
deposited  ? 

A.  I  didn't  see  that  identical  money  placed  in  the  safe. 
Q.  And  you  have  no  knowledge  how  long  it  was  there  ? 
A.  I  say  there  is  always  money  in  the  safe. 
Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  who  placed  it  there  ? 
A.  I  have  not. 

Q-  All  you  know  is  that  you  were  simply  called  in  to  take 
it  out  ? 

A.  I  say  there  is  always  money  in  the  safe. 
Q.  What  were  you  called  in  for  ? 

A.  I  have  said  that  I  received  money  from  the  Mayor  fre- 
quently. Frequently  he  hands  me  large  sums  of  money. 
Sometimes  he  hands  it  to  me  in  bulk  and  I  place  it  in  the  safe, 
and  at  other  times  he  hands  me  the  money  and  I  count  it  and 
then  place  it  in  the  safe.  I  never  know  what  is  taken  out  by 
him.  I  simply  take  out  what  he  tells  me  to  take  out.  He 
may  take  out  a  certain  sum  one  day,  and  the  following  day  tell 
me  to  put  a  certain  sum  in.  I  am  not  directed  by  him  to  keep 
an  account  of  what  is  in  the  safe.    He  knows. 

Q.  What  were  you  called  in  for  on  this  particular  day  ? 

A.  I  was  called  in  and  he  told  me  he  wished  to  make  a 
deposit. 


406 


Q.  But  what  first  ? 
A.  To  open  the  safe. 
Q.  And  you  did  that? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 
Q.  Then  what  ? 

A.  Well,  he  went  to  the  desk  and  made  out  the  deposit. 
Q.  What  did  he  take  from  the  safe  ? 

A.  I  saw  him  go  to  it  and  take  money  out  of  the  safe.  Then 
he  made  up  the  account  to  make  the  deposit  and  called  me  to 
take  it. 

Q.  Then  you  simply  opened  the  safe,  and  the  money  was 
taken  out  by  the  Mayor,  and  the  deposit  was  got  ready  and 
you  made  it  ? 

A.  That  is  all. 

By  Mr.  Bardsle}^ : 

Q.  You  don't  know  how  much  was  taken  out  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  ;  except  that  he  made  out  the  ticket  and  I 
went  down  and  deposited  the  money  he  handed  to  me  with  the 
bank  book. 

Q.  We  simply  want  to  know  when  that  money  was  put  in 
the  safe  that  you  saw  him  take  out  ? 
A.  Which  money  ? 

Q.  The  money  that  he  took  out  ? 

A.  I  have  said  several  [times  that  there  was  always  money 
in  the  safe. 

Q.  I  want  you,  if  you  please,  to  tell  this  Committee  when 
you  saw  that  money  put  in  the  safe  that  the  Mayor  took  out 
on  that  day  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  when  it  was  put  in,  or  whether  he  put  it 
in  or  whether  I  put  it  in. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  that  money  was  put  in  a  couple 
of  days  before  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  anything  about  that. 


407 


Q.  Might  it  have  been  ? 

A.  I  can  only  answer  bj  saying  I  don't  know  anything 
about  it. 

Q.  You  have  told  us  that  you  have  the  combination  of  the 
safe  and  that  you  were  the  custodian  of  the  moneys  there,  and 
the  Mayor  brings  you  here  to  corroborate  him.  Now,  this 
committee  don't  think  that  you  have  corroborated  him,  and 
don't  think  that  you  have  told  enough.  You  may  not  know, 
but  we  want  to  know  when  that  money  went  into  the  safe  ? 

A.  Which  money  ? 

Q.  The  money  you  saw  him  take  out  ? 

A.  I  can  simply  reiterate  my  statement  that  there  is  money 
going  into  the  safe  and  coming  out  at  different  times,  and  I 
am  not  able  to  specify  any  sum  that  goes  in  or  that  comes  out. 

Q.  Did  the  Mayor  take  out  as  much  as  $5,000  ? 

A.  He  went  to  the  safe  and  got  out  the  money,  and  made 
out  the  ticket  and  gave  me  the  book,  and  told  me  to  go  and 
make  the  deposit. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  there  was  $5,000  in  the  safe  the  day 
before  ? 

A.  I  have  told  you  I  don't  know. 

Q.  Was  there  anything  there  the  day  before  ? 

A.  There  is  always  money  there. 

Q.  About  how  much  money  was  there  the  day  before  ? 
A.  I  can  only  say  that  there  is  always  money  in  the  safe. 
Q.  Did  you  have  $10,000  there  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  what  is  in  the  safe. 

Q.  Then,  all  you  know  is  that  you  saw  the  Mayor  take  out 
some  money  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  more  than  a  $100. 

A.  I  don^t  know.  He  took  out  some  money  and  went  to 
his  desk,  and  when  he  had  made  out  the  ticket  he  told  me  to 
go  and  make  the  deposit. 


408 


Q.  You  don't  know  how  much  he  had  taken  out  ? 

A.  That  is  what  I  have  told  you. 

Q.  You  don't  know  how  much  was  there  ? 

A.  I  never  know  what  is  in  the  safe. 

Q.  You  don't  know  anything  at  all,  except  that  there  is 
always  money  in  the  safe  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  is  about  all  you  know  ? 

A.  I  have  told  you  that  there  is  always  money  in  the  safe, 
and  very  often  large  sums  of  money. 

Q.  But  you  cannot  tell  what  there  was  in  the  safe  three 
months  ago,  nor  the  day  before  the  deposit  was  made  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know  the  amounts. 

Q.  If  you  can  help  the  Committee  to  corroborate  the 
Mayor,  we  Avill  be  obliged  to  you,  because  he  said  that  he  had 
a  witness  to  prove  this  matter,  and  you  are  the  man  by  whom 
he  told  this  Committee  he  could  prove  that  he  had  plenty  of 
money  there  to  pay  all  demands  of  the  city.  Now,  the  sub- 
stance of  what  you  tell  us,  is  simply  this,  that  there  was  money 
put  in  and  taken  out,  more  or  less,  all  the  time ;  but  how 
much  you  don't  know  ? 

A.  I  know  that  he  went  to  his  desk  and  made  out  a  ticket 
and  handed  me  the  bank  book  with  the  money. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  the  money  which  he  gave  you  to  take 
to  the  bank  came  out  of  the  safe  ? 
A.  I  saw  him  go  to  the  safe. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  the  money  which  he  gave  you  with 
the  bank  book  came  out  of  the  safe  ?  That  is  the  question 
you  were  asked. 

A.  I  saw  him  go  to  the  safe. 

Q.  Will  you  say  to  the  Committee  that  the  money  you  took 
to  the  bank  came  out  of  the  safe  ? 

A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  it  came  out  of 
the  safe. 


409 


By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  You  say  you  never  knew  how  much  was  in  the  safe? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  the  testimony  of  the  Mayor  given  here  ? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  not  hear  him  swear  that  he  counted  the  money 
and  handed  it  over  to  you,  and  you  made  a  note  of  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  was  at  times. 

Q.  Then  you  knew  how  much  there  was  at  that  time  ? 

A.  It  was  at  different  times.  There  is  always  money  in  the 
safe,  but  how  much  at  a  particular  time  I  cannot  say.  For 
illustration — he  might  ask  me  to  verify  it,  and  I  would  verify 
that  particular  amount,  whether  it  would  be  $3,000  or  $4,000 
and  place  it  in  the  safe.  But  when  I  did  place  it  in  the  safe 
I  had  no  knowledge  of  all  that  was  in  the  safe. 

Q.  You  would  verify  it  only  when  he  handed  it  to  you,  and. 
then  put  it  in  the  safe  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Roberts : 

Q.  Then  you  never  knew  what  was  in  the  safe  altogether? 

A.  Never.  His  Honor  would  place  in  different  sums  at 
different  times. 

Q.  How  long  has  this  safe  been  there  ? 

A.  He  bought  the  safe  shortly  after  his  inauguration. 

Q.  What  else  is  kept  in  the  safe  besides  this  money  ? 
A.  Valuable  papers  of  his. 

Q.  Private  papers  ? 

A.  Private  papers,  and  jewelry  and  insurance  papers  and 
bonds.  It  is  a  private  safe  entirely.  Now,  I  would  like  to 
say  one  thing  further  about  those  checks.  The  Mayor  was 
away. 

52 


410 


By  Mr.  Lawrence : 
Q.  What  checks? 

A.  I  mean  the  checks  that  'vere  protested.  The  Mayor  was 
away.  I  left  the  office  about  3  o'clock  one  afternoon,  and  was 
informed  the  next  morning  that  a  notary  had  been  there  with 
two  checks  that  had  been  protested.  I  asked  where  they  were 
from,  and  they  told  me  that  one  of  the  checks  was  at  the  Fi- 
delity, and  that  the  other  check  was  at  the  Independence  Bank. 
I  went  to  the  Fidelity  and  saw,  I  think,  Mr.  Scott.  I 
said  to  him  that  I  understand  there  is  a  check  here  of 
Mayor  Smith's  which  has  been  protested  for  want  of  funds. 
He  said,  yes.  I  then  said,  "He  is  away  from  the  city, 
or  it  would  not  have  been  left  to  go  to  protest."  I  then 
went  to  the  Independence  Bank,  and  I  found  they  were 
the  collection  agency  for  a  New  Jersey  Bank.  I  made  the 
same  statement  to  them.  On  that  day  Major  Linton  was  ab- 
sent from  the  office.  The  follow^ing  day  either  Major  Linton 
came  to  me  or  I  went  to  him,  and  I  said  there  are  two  checks 
gone  to  protest,  and  I  cannot  understand  it  that  the  Mayor 
should  go  away  and  allow  the  checks  to  go  to  protest  He 
said  "all  right,  I  w^ill  attend  to  it."  Later  in  the  day,  or  on 
the  following  day.  But  first  I  immediately  wrote  to  each  of 
the  parties  and  told  them  that  the  Mayor  was  absent  from  the 
City,  and  that  if  the  checks  were  returned  that  were  protested 
that  they  should  please  hold  them  until  his  Honor  would  re- 
turn, as  in  all  probability  he  had  overdrawn  his  account  with- 
out knowing  it,  and  as  soon  as  he  returned  to  the  City  the 
matter  would  be  all  right.  That  afternoon,  or  the  following 
morning  Major  Linton  came  to  me  and  said  those  checks  are 
all  right.  I  have  deposited  money  to  make  them  all  right, 
and  more  too.  I  said  I  have  written  to  the  parties  and  told 
told  them  to  keep  them  until  the  Mayor's  return.  What 
amount  the  Major  deposited  I  don't  know. 


411 


Ey  Mr.  Bardsley  : 
Q.  When  was  this  ? 

A.  It  was  during  the  Mayor's  absence  from  the  City. 

Q.  On  what  date  ? 

A.  In  July. 

Q.  What  time  in  July  ? 

A.  Somewhere  between  the  6tli  and  9th. 

Q.  About  when  do  you  suppose  those  checks  were  made 
good;  on  the  8th,  9th,  oi*10th? 

A.  I  know  nothing  beyond  the  statement  I  have  made  to 
you. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  you  are  correct  as  to  the  dates? 

A.  You  asked  me  about  the  time,  and  I  said  that  I  thought 
about  the  6th  to  the  9th  of  July. 

Q.  The  check  was  protested  upon  the  13th  of  July  ? 

A.  I  only  speak  from  recollection ;  my  recollection  is  that 
the  Mayor  went  aAvay  on  the  6th  of  July,  and  returned  on  the 
loth ;  it  w^as  during  that  time  that  those  check  matters 
occurred. 

Q.  But  the  check  was  protested  on  the  13th  of  July? 
A.  I  only  answer  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief, 
that  it  was  about  that  time. 

Q.  Do  you  know  when  the  checks  were  made  good  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  About  what  date  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  just  testified  that  it  was  from  the  6th  to  the 
9th  that  they  were  made  good  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  said  it  was  about  that  time  they  went  to  pro- 
test. I  said  that  it  was  during  the  time  that  he  was  away 
from  the  office — from  the  6th  to  the  15th  of  July. 

Q.  When  do  you  suppose  it  was  that  Major  Linton  told  you 
that  he  had  made  the  amount  good  ? 

A.  I  said  either  that  afternoon  or  the  following  day. 


412 


Q.  The  day  after  the  check  was  protested. 

A.  The  afternoon  after  the  day  the  check  was  protested,  or 
the  following  day. 

Q.  That  would  be  about  the  15th  then  ? 

A.  I  am  only  speaking  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge.  I 
took  notice  of  the  thing  at  the  time,  but  only  simply  recall  it. 
I  made  no  note  of  it,  and  did  not  take  the  matter  into  consid- 
eration at  the  time.  I  have  simply  thought  of  it  since,  know- 
ing that  it  was  at  the  time  he  was  away. 

Q.  Now,  you  are  making  a  voluntary  statement.  Thi» 
Committee  did  not  ask  you  to  make  it.  They  have  the  right 
to  expect  that  you  are  stating  some  fact.  Now,  was  it  a  day 
or  two  after  the  protest  when  Major  Linton  told  you  that  it 
was  all  right  ? 

A.  It  was  the  afternoon  after  the  day  of  the  protest,  or  the 
following  morning  that  the  Major  came  to  me  and  said  it  was 
all  right. 

Q.  When  I  tell  you  it  was  protested  on  the  13th.  on  what 
date  would  you  say  it  was  that  Major  Linton  told  you  it  was 
all  right  ? 

A.  That  would  be,  then,  the  morning  of  the  15th  ? 

Q.  Now,  Mr.  Scott  in  his  testimony  testified  before  thi& 
Committee  that  the  checks  were  paid  on  the  21st,  I  think  ; 
that  these  two  checks  were  not  paid  until  the  21st  of  July, 
because  there  was  no  money  in  bank  to  pay  them.  That  is 
the  testimony  of  the  bookkeeper. 

A.  Can  I  explain  what  I  suppose  to  be  the  cause  of  that  ? 

Q.  Certainly. 

A.  I  said  that  I  wrote  to  the  parties  for  them  to  hold  the 
checks  until  the  Mayor's  return.  I  don't  think  they  pre- 
sented them  again  for  payment  during  the  time  between  the 
13th  and  the  21st.  They  may  have  been  holding  the  checks, 
and  did  not  present  them  for  payment  until  the  21st;  but  that 
does  not  prove  that  the  Major  did  not  come  to  me  and  say  that 
he  had  deposited  the  money  to  pay  the  checks. 


413 


By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  notary  brought  the 
protests  to  you  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  the  matter  come  to  your  knowledge? 

A.  From  Captain  Leaborn — that  a  Notary  came  in  and 
asked  for  Major  Linton.  He  was  absent,  and  then  he  said 
that  I  was  the  next  one  who  could  answer  the  questions. 

Q.  I  thought  I  understood  you  that  the  Notary  came  to 
you? 

A.  No,  sir.  Then  I  went  to  the  bank  and  saw  Mr.  Scott, 
and  then  went  to  the  Independence  Bank  and  told  them  why  I 
supposed  the  checks  had  gone  to  protest,  because  the  Mayor  was 
absent  from  the  city,  and  that  he  had  overdrawn  his  account, 
of  course,  not  knowing  it. 

Q.  The  protests  were  not  presented  to  you  then  ? 
A.  I  got  the  notice  from  Captain  Leabourn. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Did  you  ever  count  as  much  as  $15,000  there  in  that 
safe  ? 

A.  I  think  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  count  it  ? 

A.  I  said  I  thought  about  six  months  ago. 

Q.  Who  was  there  ? 

A.  As  a  rule,  if  I  count  the  money  after  office  hours,  I  close 
the  door  and  lock  it. 

Q.  Were  you  alone  ? 

A.  I  don't  say  I  was  alone,  but  that  is  my  usual  custom. 

Q.  Was  there  anybody  there  when  you  counted  it  ? 
A.  If  anybody  was  there  it  was  the  Mayor  only. 

Q.  Nobody  was  there  unless  it  was  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


414 

Q.  Do  you  sometimes  count  it  when  he  is  not  there? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  he  hands  it  to  me  in  bulk. 

Q.  The  safe  is  left  open  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  it  is  not  left  open.  If  he  goes  to  the  safe  he 
locks  it  before  leaving  it,  and  if  I  go  to  the  safe  I  lock  it 
again. 

Q.  Was  that  sum  in  small  notes  or  large  notes  ? 
A.  I  do  not  remember. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  you  lock  the  door  when  you  counted 
the  money  ? 

A.  I  do  very  often. 

Q.  After  you  had  counted  it,  what  did  you  do  ? 

A.  I  am  not  speaking  of  any  particular  sum  of  money  ? 

Q.  But  you  say  that  you  counted  as  much  as  $15,000  ? 
A.  I  said  that  I  supposed  I  did. 

Q.  Was  the  Mayor  present  when  you  counted  it  ? 
A.  I  won't  say  that. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  counting  $15,000  and  putting  it  in 
the  safe  ? 

A.  I  do  not  say  it  was  that  sum. 

Q.  But  a  sum  approximating  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  After  you  had  done  counting  it,  what  did  you  do  with 
it? 

A.  I  put  it  in  the  safe. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  When  that  $15,000  was  put  in  the  safe,  was  that  in  ad- 
dition to  other  money  in  the  safe  ? 

A.  There  was  always  money  in  the  safe. 


415 


Mayor  Smith : — I  desire  to  say  to  the  Committee  that  I 
never  gave  Mr.  Fell  any  money  without  a  memorandum  of  the 
amount.  He  would  count  it,  and  verify  it  and  return  me  the 
memorandum.    I  kept  that  myself. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  After  you  had  done  counting  the  money,  you  would  just 
put  it  together  and  put  it  in  the  safe  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 


William  B.  Smith,  recalled. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Mr.  Fell  has  just  testified  that  he  put  money  in  the  safe 
and  that  he  did  not  know  how  much  was  taken  out  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  give  him  a  memorandum  ? 

A.  He  always  knew  the  amount.  He  counted  it.  But 
when  he  put  it  in  the  safe  he  did  not  know  as  a  rule  the 
amount  in  there — that  it  was  added  to.  Mr.  Fell  has  access 
at  all  times  to  that  money,  and  I  can  say  on  my  oath  that  I 
don't  believe,  without  instructions,  that  he  ever  touched  or 
handled  or  looked  at  a  single  memorandum  in  the  safe. 

Q.  Now,  can  you  tell  us  about  how  those  deposits  were 
made  up  concerning  which  you  were  asked  when  you  were  on 
the  stand  before  ? 

A.  July  7  was  money  that  I  gave  to  Major  Linton,  the 
day  or  two  before  I  left  Philadelphia,  for  deposit.  July  12 
was  $120,  which  he  deposited  out  of  moneys  in  his  hands 
of  which  he  had  no  need.  July  14  was  made  up  of  various 
sums  from  various  sources.  I  will  say  that  a  large  sum 
of  money  was  given  by  me  to  Major  Linton  before  I  left 
the  City. 


416 


Q.  Do  you  object  to  telling  us  where  that  money  came 
from— the  $1,907.62  ? 

A.  I  think  probably,  the  greater  portion  of  that  came  out  of 
this  identical  safe.  I  often  bank  sums  of  money,  and  I  make 
it  a  rule  in  banking,  to  send  the  small  notes,  the  irregular 
money  or  fractions  of  sums,  so  that  I  can  keep  the  large 
amount  in  the  safe. 

Q.  By  irregular  money  you  mean  what  ? 

A.  Ones  and  twos,  small  notes  and  sometimes  I  have  on 
hand  considerable  coin,  trade  dollars  or  gold. 

Q.  The  deposit  of  July  14  was  the  day  before  you  returned  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  that  was  composed  of? 

A.  I  cannot  say,  but  Major  Linton  says  that  he  made  the 
money  up  out  of  a  great  many  memorandums  which  he  gave  to 
me  upon  my  return. 

Q.  And  he  says  that  he  does  not  know  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  ? 

A.  He  says  that  I  left  on  the  morning  of  the  7th. 

Q.  Then  you  gave  it  to  him  on  the  6th  ? 

A.  The  afternoon  of  the  6th  or  the  morning  of  the  7th. 


John  L.  Linton^  recalled. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman) : 

Q.  What  have  you  to  say  about  that  deposit  of  the  14th  ? 

A.  The  deposit  of  the  14th  was  made  up  of  a  great  many 
sums  of  money  which  had  been  paid  on  account  of  the  Mayor 
— private  money,  of  which  I  gave  him  a  memorandum,  but 
kept  none.  On  his  return,  I  gave  him  a  memorandum  show- 
ing from  whom  I  had  received  the  money,  and  I  know  there 
were  a  number  of  persons. 


417 


By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  money  out  of  the  safe  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Mayor  Smith  :  I  will  say  that  he  did  not  have  access  to  the 
safe. 

The  Witness  :  The  Mayor  left  about  12  or  1  o'clock.  I 
think  it  was  the  very  morning  he  left,  that  he  gave  me  the 
money  to  deposit,  which  has  been  spoken  of. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  That  was  in  addition  to  the  sum  which  you  have  already 
referred  to  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  the  $1^:0  were  deposited  by  reason  of  inform- 
ation I  had  from  the  bank  that  there  was  an  overdraft,  and  to 
make  it  good  I  took  some  of  the  money  that  he  left  with  me, 
to  make  up  the  amount. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  You  don't  know  what  the  large  sum  consisted  of,  you 
say  ? 

A.  It  was  made  up  of  a  variety  of  sums. 
Q.  Checks? 

A.  Most  of  it  was  money. 
Q.  Were  there  any  checks  ? 

A.  I  don't  recollect  whether  there  were  any  checks — 
whether  it  was  money  or  checks. 
Q.  Were  there  large  notes  ? 

A.  I  think  some  of  them  were,  but  I  cannot  really  recol- 
lect the  quality  of  the  money  composing  that  sum. 
Q.  From  whom  did  you  receive  it  ? 

A.  I  dont  know ;  I  kept  no  memorandum  myself  because 
it  was  the  Mayor's  own  private  business. 
Q.  Do  you  remember  any  portion  of  it  ? 
A.  Not  a  single  item. 


418 


Q.  And  you  don't  remember  one  person  from  whom  you 
got  it  ? 

A.  I  hoped  I  had  kept  a  copy  of  the  memorandum  which  I 
gave  to  the  Mayor,  but  I  have  examined  my  desk  thoroughly, 
and  some  of  the  drawers  in  the  office  and  I  cannot  find  it.  I 
regret  that  I  cannot  find  it. 

By  Mr  Lawrence : 

Q.  It  was  the  Mayor's  private  business  ? 

A.  Entirely ;  it  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  licences,  or 
with  public  moneys,  I  think  some  of  it  may  have  come  from 
his  Third  street  store.  I  think  so,  but  I  am  not  sure  about 
it. 


Alexander  G-ray^  recalled. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  You  were  on  the  stand  yesterday,  and  you  stated  that 
you  were  a  police  officer,  ancl  now  on  the  force  as  a  special 
officer,  and  had  been  on  since  the  1st  of  January,  and  that 
during  that  time,  so  far  as  your  memory  would  assist  you,  you 
had  been  on  active  duty  all  the  time  except  about  two  months, 
during  which  time  you  had  not  been  on  active  duty.  You 
were  asked  by  the  Committee  what  was  the  character  of  the 
service  you  had  performed  ?  Your  answer  was  Special  duty, 
in  several  districts  or  all  over  the  city,  and  that  you  were  de- 
tailed by  the  Chief  of  Police.  We  asked  you  what  was  the 
character  of  the  duty  you  had  been  performing,  or  the  duty 
you  had  performed,  and  you  said  that  you  declined  to  answer. 
Now,  as  a  servant  of  the  city,  we  thought  that  you  should  tell 
us  something  about  the  services  you  had  performed  for  the  city. 

A.  It  was  my  duty,  and  I  reported  to  the  Chief  of  Police. 
I  thought  it  would  be  detrimental  to  the  interests  of  the  service 
if  I  should  tell  you  what  I  had  been  at. 


419 


Q.  Tell  us  some  of  the  work  you  did  in  order  to  satisfy  us 
tliat  you  really  did  something.  Because  your  answer  was, 
when  the  question  was  put  to  you,  "  What  have  you  been  do- 
ing to-day?"  "  I  decline  to  answer."  Then  the  question  was 
put  to  you,  "Why  do  you  decline  to  answer,"  and  in  sub- 
stance you  said,  that  it  would  not  be  to  the  interests  of  the 
service  to  tell  what  you  were  doing.  Then  you  were  asked 
about  other  days,  what  you  were  doing  on  other  days,  and 
when  you  were  asked  about  one  day,  you  were  asked  again 
what  you  did  the  day  before,  and  you  answered,  "  I  was  ab- 
sent from  the  city."  And  you  also  said  you  were  down  in 
Maryland  and  in  Atlantic  City ;  now  wont  you  tell  the  Com- 
mittee what  you  were  doing — what  was  the  nature  or  character 
of  the  work  you  did  ? 

A.  Well,  I  did  work  for  the  Fire  Marshal,  in  investi2:atin2' 
cases  of  supposed  arson. 

Q.  That  is,  investigating  cases  of  arson  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  your  capacity  as  a  detective  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  then  I  was  investigating  cases  for  the 
Chief  of  Police,  and  in  connection  with  the  Detective  Depart- 
ment. I  was  working  with  officers,  or  in  connection  with 
officers  belonging  to  the  Detective  Department. 

Q.  It  is  currently  reported  that  you  were  a  special  officer  at 
the  theatre  on  Chestnut  street  ? 
A.  So  I  see  it  reported. 

Q.  What  have  you  to  say  about  that — were  you  not  ? 
A.  I  was  not. 

Q.  You  never  did  any  duty  there  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  not  at  the  Temple  Theatre  or  for  any  person 
connected  with  it. 

Q.  You  never  received  any  payment  from  there  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  and  I  suppose  that  the  records  of  the  theatre 
will  show  that. 


420 


Q.  Did  you  ever  act  as  a  "go-between,"  or  in  any  capacity 
between  the  criminals  and  the  city  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  have  anything  to  do  with  the  policy  men  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  yon  ever  arrest  any  of  them  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  frequently. 
Q.  Well,  tell  us  when  ? 

A.  I  have  not  any  record  of  that.  The  records  of  the 
office  will  show  it. 

Q.  The  last  two,  three,  or  four  months  1  am  speaking  about. 
I  am  referring  to  what  you  have  done  since  the  first  of  the 
year. 

A.  I  have  had  nothing  to  do  wath  them  since  that  time. 

Q.  It  is  reported  in  certain  circles  that  you  are  what  is 
called  a  "go-between."  That  for  the  last  two  or  three  years 
you  have  been  "in"  with  the  policy  men.  Do  you  understand 
what  that  term  means  ? 

A.  I  cannot  help  the  reports  which  are  floating  around. 
There  are  a  great  many  reports  about  all  of  us. 

Q.  Of  course.  I  understand  that.  Will  you  tell  us  whether 
there  is  any  truth  in  that  ? 

A.  Not  as  I  know,  and  I  ought  to  be  the  best  judge  of  it. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  mixed  up  at  any  time  while  you 
have  been  on  the  force,  within  the  last  two  years,  as  a  "  go  be- 
tween "  between  the  Police  Department  and  policy  shops  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  What  do  you  understand  by  the  term  "  go  between  ?" 

A.  I  understand  it  to  mean  a  man  that  protects  them. 

Q.  Well,  let  us  understand  it ;  I  am  asking  you  as  a  detec- 
tive. What  do  you  understand  that  term  to  mean  ? 

A.  I  understand  it  to  mean  a  party  who  furnishes  informa- 
tion, from  the  Police  Department  to  the  policy  people,  or  who 
gives  them  protection  in  some  way  or  other. 


421 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  There  is  no  truth  at  all  in  that  report  concerning  your- 
self? 

A.  Not  so  far  as  I  am  concerned. 

Q.  During  the  last  six  months  you  have  performed  such 
duties  as  Chief  Stewart  required  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  report  directly  to  him  and  are  answerable  to  him  ? 
A.  To  the  Chief  of  Police. 

Q.  With  the  Chief  of  Detectives,  Chief  Kelly,  what  have 
you  to  do  ? 

A.  I  have  had  no  connection  with  Chief  Kelly  since  the 
6th  of  last  November.  I  would  like  to  say  that  we  do  not  even 
speak. 

Q.  You  were  on  the  detective  force  before? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  until  the  6th  of  last  November. 

Q.  The  Chief  told  us  what  you  yourself  said,  that  you  were 
discharged  under  a  misapprehension,  and  that  when  the  facts 
were  learned  they  determined  to  replace  you ;  that  was  the 
testimony  of  Chief  Stewart  this  morning. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Did  you  receive  a  full  month's  pay  in  August  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  your  pay  cease  ? 

A.  On  the  31st  of  July. 

Q.  What  money  did  you  draw  in  August  ? 

A.  None. 

Q.  Why  was  that  ? 

A.  Well,  I  have  not  got  it. 

Q.  Were  you  certified  to  the  Controller  as  being  entitled  to 
your  pay  for  August  ? 
A.  I  could  not  tell  you. 


422 


Q.  Did  you  get  a  full  month's  pay  in  July  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  have  not  received  any  pay  for  August? 
A.  No,  sir. 
Q.  Why? 

A.  My  warrant  has  been  withheld. 

Q.  Was  it  certified  to  the  Controller  that  you  were  entitled 
to  pay  for  August  ? 

A.  I  suppose  so.  The  Controller  can  vouch  for  that.  I 
did  not  get  it. 

Q.  Did  you  make  application  for  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  To  whom? 

A.  To  the  Chief. 

Q.  What  did  he  tell  you  about  it  ? 

A.  He  told  me  that  the  warrant  had  been  withheld. 

Q.  By  him  or  by  the  Controller  ? 

A.  It  was  told  me  by  both  Howard  March  and  the  Chief. 
By  Mr.  Bardsley. 

Q.  They  both  told  you  that  the  Controller  withheld  it  ? 
A.  That  he  refused  to  countersign  it. 

Q.  Was  there  any  reason  why  he  should  withhold  it  that 
you  know  of? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  reason  why  he  should  withhold  it  ^ 
A.  I  do  not  see  why. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  Now  I  see  (referring  to  a  statement  in  the  printed 
pamphlet  of  testimony)  that  there  was  a  claim  of  $73.75.  The 
Controller  says  that  in  August  there  was  that  claim,  but  that 
the  warrant  was  not  signed.  What  police  duty  did  you  do  in 
August  for  this  city  ? 

A.  I  was  doing  some  work  for  the  Chief,  and  I  was  absent 
from  the  city. 


423 

Q.  Where  did  you  do  any  police  duty  out  of  the  city  ? 
A.  No  where  at  all. 

Q.  Did  you  do  any  police  duty  out  of  the  city  in  July  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  saw  me  at  Atlantic  City  frequently  during  those 
two  months  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  were  not  on  police  duty  then  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  But  you  drew  your  pay  for  the  time  while  you  were 
down  there  and  not  doing  any  duty  ? 

A.  I  will  tell  you  this,  that  I  was  working  on  a  couple  of 
cases  down  there — a  couple  of  robberies  concerning  people  in 
Philadelphia. 

Q.  How  long  did  that  take  you  ? 
A.  Two  or  three  days. 

Q.  And  the  rest  of  the  time  while  you  wxre  down  there  you 
drew  pay^  although  you  were  not  doing  any  duty  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.    That  is  about  it. 

Q.  Did  your  superior  officers  know  that  you  were  not  doing 
duty  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  could  they  fail  to  know  ? 

A.  Well,  because  when  I  went  down  there  it  was  unbe- 
known to  them. 

Q.  In  other  words  you  just  sneaked  off? 
A.  Yes  sir,  many  others  do  so,  and  I  would  do  it  again  if 
I  got  the  chance. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Did  you  ever  carry  any  money  to  the  Chief  of  Police 
from  anybody  within  the  last  two  years  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


424 


Q.  Did  you  ever  take  any  money  from  any  person  and  carry 

it  to  the  Chief  of  Police  ?  \ 

A.  No,  sir.  ■ 

Q.  Do  you  know  anybody  else  who  did  it?  ] 

A.  No,  sir.    I  do  not.  \ 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  it  was  done — from  policy  dealers,  if  j 

you  please  ?  \ 
A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  any  rumors  of  that  kind  ? 

A.  The  Chief  can  answer  that  question  himself.  • 

Q.  But  I  am  asking  you  so  far  as  you  know  ?  j 

A.  There  have  been  a  great  many  rumors  about  me,  like  ! 

that  one  about  my  being  at  the  Temple  Theatre.  I 

By  Mr.  Clay  :  ! 

Q.  You  said  that  you  sneaked  off  like  others  in  the  depart-  i 

ment..   Now  who  were  some  of  those  others  ?  i 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  propose  to  tell  on  anybody  else  because  I  ] 

happened  to  get  caught.    I  am  caught  and  that  settles  it.  | 

1 


John  F.  Smith,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law,  testified 
as  follows: 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  (Chairman)  : 
Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  a  furniture  manufacturer  by  trade,  but  I  am  not 
doing  anything  since  the  first  of  September. 

Q.  Have  you  been  on  the  police  force  at  any  time  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  it  ? 

A.  I  sent  in  my  resignation  on  the  last  day  of  August,  to 
take  effect  the  first  day  of  September. 


425 

Q.  When  did  you  go  on  the  force  ? 

A.  On  the  6th  of  April.  I  was  sworn  in  on  the  6th  and 
wrent  on  duty  on  the  7  th. 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  1238  South  Tenth  street. 

Q.  To  what  district  were  you  assigned  ? 

A.  I  was  detailed  for  special  duty  at  the  Twenty -fifth  police 
district  to  take  charge  of  alterations  and  attend  to  material 
that  was  left. 

Q.  Was  that  service  performed  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  days  did  you  serve  ? 

A.  Every  day  until  I  sent  in  my  resignation. 


Ijzra  Lukens,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  testified  as 
follows : 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman). 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Assistant  clerk  at  the  Mayor's  office. 

Q.  I  believe  the  Committee  want  to  examine  you  upon  the 
subject  of  fees  for  the  swearing  in  of  private  watchmen. 

A.  1  have  charge  principally  of  swearing  in  private  watch- 
men and  patrolmen,  and  some  four  hundred  have  been  sworn 
in  since  I  have  been  there. 

By  Mr.  Clay. 

Q.  Is  there  a  fee  charge  for  swearing  them  in  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  There  is  no  charge  ? 
A.  Never. 
54 


426 


Q.  Who  furnishes  them  with  badges — the  department  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  procure  them  outside.  When  they  ask 
where  to  go  we  recommend  them  to  go  to  a  certain  place  on 
Market  street. 

Q.  When  they  come  to  the  office  and  make  application  to  be 
sworn  in,  no  fee  is  charged  to  swear  them  in  ? 
A.  There  is  no  fee. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Private  watchmen  are  watchmen  who  are  recommended 
by  citizens  to  watch  their  places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  and  by  corporations. 

Q.  The  citizens  themselves  pay  them  ? 

A.  Certainly.  For  instance,  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad 
has  a  large  number,  and  so  have  other  corporations. 

Q.  They  simply  get  sworn  in  as  private  watchmen  to  give 
them  a  certain  amount  of  authority  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir — authority  for  them  to  carry  firearms,  and  have 
a  badge,  and  to  make  arrests,  the  same  as  police  officers. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  in  the  department  ? 
A.  Since  the  middle  of  February  last. 
Q.  What  are  your  duties  ? 

A.  I  am  assistant  to  the  Chief  Clerk,  or  have  been  up  to 
the  present  time.  Mr.  March  was  Chief  Clerk.  I  am  espe- 
cially charged  with  issuing  these  commissions  to  the  special 
officers,  and  attend  to  sundry  correspondence. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  Mayor's  correspondence  ? 

A.  Not  his  private  correspondence,  but  correspondence  of 
an  official  character — applications  for  information,  such  as 
come  from  neighboring  cities,  in  regard  to  police  matters. 
Every  communication  of  that  kind  requires  to  be  attended  to. 

Q.  Are  you  fully  employed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


Q.  With  those  duties  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  special  watchmen  have  been  sworn  in  since"- 
this  morning  ? 
A.  None  to-day. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  to-day,  then  ? 

A.  I  was  there  until  about  one  o'clock,  when  I  received  a 
notification  to  appear  here,  and  I  have  been  here  ever  since. 

Q.  That  is,  since  one  o'clock  ?  What  were  you  doing  in 
the  ofiice  before  one  o'clock  ? 

A.  I  was  there  ready  to  perform  any  duties. 

Q.  Well,  you  were  ready  to  perform  it,  but  you  had  no  duty 
to  do? 

A.  Not  to-day. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  There  is  not  much  duty  going  on  in  your  ofiice  now^, 
because  of  this  investigation  ? 
A.  Not  much. 

Q.  It  has  put  a  sort  of  block  on  the  wheels  of  your  ofiice  ? 
A.  Well,  I  will  say  that  some  twenty  or  thirty  were  sworn, 
in  last  week. 


Isaac  H.  Shields,  re-called. 

Examination  by  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  this  large  amount  of  money 
said  to  be  kept  by  the  Mayor  in  his  safe  ? 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  any  amount,  but  I  know  about  it 
this — that  on  one  occasion  some  time  this  year,  as  near  as  I 
can  tell  three  or  four,  or  six  months  ago,  I  saw  Mr.  Fell  come 
into  the  Mayor's  Ofiice,  and  get  the  keys  from  the  Mayor,  of 
the  safe  that  stands  in  the  Mayor's  Ofiice.    He  opened  it,  and 


428 

in  the  opening  of  it,  as  I  stood  near  him,  I  saw  what  seemed 
to  me  to  be  large  amounts  of  money.  The  safe  was  locked  and 
he  went  out,  and  I  called  the  Mayor's  attention  to  the  fact 
whether  it  was  safe  to  have  so  large  an  amount  of  money  as 
appeared  to  me  to  be  there,  as  I  had  seen  it  a  few  minutes 
before.  His  answer  Avas  that  "  The  watchman  stays  in  this 
room  all  night."  The  old  gentlemen  who  is  watchman  there. 
That  seemed  satisfactory  to  him,  but  the  amount  seemed  to 
me  to  be  so  large — there  were  two  large  packages  of  money. 

Q.  You  judged  by  the  bulk,  altogether? 

A.  Altogether. 

Q.  They  were  in  bank  notes  ? 

A.  In  bank  notes.  There  were  some  small  packages  lying 
there,  and  then  these  that  I  referred  to  would  make — I  don't 
know  how  large  sized  ^hey  were,  but  they  stood  so  high  (indi- 
cating with  his  hands). 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  They  were  nice  looking  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you  that ;  all  money  looks  nice  to  me. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Qou  say  you  saw  Mr.  Fell  get  the  keys  of  the  safe  ? 
A.  That  is  my  recollection. 

Q.  But  the  safe  has  a  combination  ;  w^hat  keys  did  he  re- 
quire ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  there  was  something  he  used.  I  said  a 
key,  but  whether  advisably  or  not  I  don't  know ;  but  I  did 
think  he  used  something  to  open  the  safe,  or  to  do  something. 
He  spoke  to  the  Mayor.  I  am  unable  to  say  that  he  had  a 
key  in  his  hands. 

Q.  There  might  have  been  an  inside  door  to  the  safe  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  ;  but  it  struck  me  as  unsafe,  and  so  I 
called  his  attention  to  what  I  thought  maybe  he  didn't  know. 


429 


Q.  Can  you  locate  the  time  ? 

A.  I  have  done  the  best  I  could  about  that.  I  was  sitting 
in  this  room  and  my  attention  was  called  to  the  matter  by  a 
statement  of  the  Mayor,  and  I  spoke  to  one  of  the  counsel  for 
the  Mayor,  and  I  suppose  that  is  the  reason  why  I  have  been 
recalled. 


Charles   W.    Wood,  being  duly  '  sworn,  according   to  law, 
testified,  as  follows  : 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  No.  1809  North  Twenty-second  street. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  now  have  charge  of  the  fire  appliances  at  Mr.  Wana- 
maker's. 

Q.  Were  you  in  the  employ  of  the  city  at  any  time  lately? 
A.  Not  since  the  19th  of  March. 

Q.  Of  this  year  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  did  you  then  serve  ? 
A.  I  was  Fire  Marshal. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  these  fees  in  relation  to  the 
petroleum  licenses  ? 

A.  In  w^hat  respect  do  you  mean  ? 
Q.  You  made  certain  surveys  ? 

A.  I  did.  I  made  some  examinations  of  places  where  they 
had  coal  oil  stored. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  you  made  ? 
A.  In  all  about  thirty-five  or  thirty-six. 
Q.  There  was  some  fee  for  that  service  ? 
A.  I  got  in  each  case  $2.50  from  Major  Linton. 


430 


Q.  Was  that  the  entire  amount  of  the  fee  ? 
A.  That  was  the  entire  amount  I  got. 

Q.  Where  did  he  get  it  ? 

A.  I  don't  know ;  that  is,  I  cannot  testify  of  my  own 
^knowledge. 

Q.  You  didn't  collect  the  fees  ? 
A.  I  didn't. 

Q.  Who  did  collect  them  ? 

A.  I  presume  he  did. 

Q.  He  turned  over  that  much  to  you  ? 

A.  He  gave  me  $2.50  in  each  case. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  get  in  all  ? 

A.  About  $85.  There  is  one  case  concerning  which  I  am 
in  doubt  whether  I  made  a  report  upon  it  or  not,  or  received 
a  fee.  I  made  reports  of  all  cases  I  examined  which  were 
handed  to  me  to  examine,  and  I  received  $2.50  in  all  of  them. 
That  is  about  $5.  There  is  one  that  I  am  in  doubt  about, 
whether  I  received  any  money  from  it.  That  is  the  case  of 
Mr.  King,  on  Arch  street.  I  was  on  my  way  to  the  store  of 
Mr.  King  on  the  afternoon  of  the  coal  oil  fire.  I  stopped  at 
a  news  company  to  get  a  paper,  and  while  I  was  there  some 
one  told  me  that  there  was  a  fire,  or  that  there  was  a  great 
smoke  in  the  clouds,  and  I  looked  up  and  saw  it,  and  I  run 
to  the  office  and  found  out  where  the  fire  was  and  went  there. 
Of  course,  the  place  was  burned  out.  I  am  in  doubt  whether 
I  made  any  examination  or  made  any  report  about  the  place 
where  they  moved  to.  They  moved  into  the  building  occupied 
by  the  Sun  Light  Oil  Company,  I  think. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Major  Linton  testified  to-day  that  there  were  about  sixty 
odd  applications  for  licenses,  upon  which  the  fees  were  paid, 
and  upon  which  you  received  $2.50  on  each  one,  and  that  you 
only  made  surveys  on  about  twenty-six.    I  believe  I  am  cor- 


431 


rect  in  the  figures,  Major  Linton  ?  (Addressing  Major  Lin- 
ton, who  is  present  in  the  Chamber.) 

Major  Linton : 

It  is  sixty-one.  But  you  are  wrong  in  regard  to  the  amount 
of  $2.50.  I  swore  that  I  received  S5.00  for  Mr.  Wood  in  the 
wholesale  cases,  and  $2.50  in  the  retail  cases. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  How  many  surveys  did  he  make?  (addressing  Major 
Linton  ?) 

Major  Linton : 

Twenty-six  are  on  file  in  the  ofiice.  He  may  have  made 
more,  but  he  never  returned  them  to  the  office. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley :  (addressing  the  witness,  Mr.  Wood.) 

Q.  You  hear  that  there  were  sixty-one  places  that  were 
paid  for,  and  that  you  were  paid  for,  and  yet  that  you  made 
only  twenty-six  surveys,  or  reported  the  same  to  the  office  ? 
A  portion  of  those  were  wholesale  licenses,  upon  which  you 
received  $5.00,  and  another  portion  were  retail  licenses,  upon 
which  you  received  $2.50 — those  amounts  being  one-half  of 
the  fees  supposed  to  be  legally  chargeable.    Is  that  so  ? 

A.  It  is  not  so.  I  received  $2.50  in  each  case.  I  do  not 
know  how  many  applications  were  made.  There  were  surveyed 
by  me  some  37  or  38  cases.  He  made  some  records,  but  I 
never  got  the  benefit  of  them. 

Q.  He  said  that  you  were  paid  in  t)l  cases  ? 
A.  I  was  not. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  How  much  money  did  you  receive  ? 
A.  I  think  $85. 


432 


By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  the  $85  were  made  up — of  how 
many,  ?5  ? 

A.  I  do  not?  The  law  does  not  mention  wholesale,  but  it 
says  that  refineries  or  plaaes  of  large  storage  houses  that  have 
quantities  greater  than  25  barrels  shall  pay  a  license  fee  of 
110. 

Q.  How  many  of  those  were  there  ? 

A.  I  can  give  you  the  list  of  all  that  I  examined. 

Q.  But  how  many  did  you  get  paid  for  ? 

A.  Only  for  35. 

Q.  Wholesale? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  were  not  paid  the  $5  in  any  one  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  am  not  sure  about  the  record  in  Mr.  King's 
case.  I  don't  remember  of  receiving  any  money  on  that  ac- 
count. If  I  did,  I  did  not  make  a  memorandum  of  it.  Still, 
I  have  assumed  that  I  did  receive  it,  because  I  am  in  doubt. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  17  at  $5  each  would  be  $85,  and  34  at  $2.50  each  would 
be  $85. 

A.  There  were  either  34  or  35  cases  that  I  received  $2.50. 
By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  In  how  many  cases  did  you  receive  $5  ? 
A.  None. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  You  did  not  receive  more  than  $85  in  the  total  ? 

A.  The  total  amount  was  $85.  I  want  to  say  that  the  law 
prohibits  the  refining  or  storing  of  certain  coal  oil  within  cer- 
tain limits — within  the  limits  of  Mifflin  street  and  Allegheny 
avenue — in  quantities  greater  than  25  barrels.  When  they 
are  kept  on  storage  in  such  cases,  the  license  fee  is  $5  and  the 
Marshall's  fee  is  $5. 


433 


By  Mr.  Roberts : 

Q.  In  ^vhat  cases  is  the  Marshall's  fee  $10. 
A.  Where  a  refinery  carries,  or  were  there  is  on  storage  a 
greater  quantity  than  25  barrels. 

Q.  How  many  such  cases  were  there  ? 

A.  I  received  pretty  much  the  larger  classes  of  dealers. 
Two  or  three  cases  I  received  were  where  it  was  in  small 
quantities,  5  or  10  or  15  barrels. 

Q.  I  ^vant  to  know  in  how  many  cases  the  Marshal's  fee 
was  §10.  and  in  how  many  cases  the  Marshal's  fee  was  $5. 
Tell  us  in  how  many  it  was  $10  ? 

A.  I  think  11. 

Q.  But  is  not  the  Fire  Marshal's  fee  $5  in  every  case  ? 

A.  The  law  says  that  all  refineries  or  storage  places  of 
quantities  of  more  than  25  barrels  shall  pay  a  fine  of  $10  ; 
that  is,  for  his  own  use.  He  says  that  he  shall  have  the  right 
to  demand  it  before  any  survey,  or  before  any  examination — 
for  his  own  use. 

Q.  How  many  of  those  places  are  there  ? 
A.  Eleven. 

Q.  In  which  your  fees  would  have  been  $10  ? 
A.  l'e;5,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  cases  were  there  in  which  your  fee  would 
have  been  $5  ? 

A.  Twenty-four — counting  King  &  Sons  in. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  That  would  be  35  cases  ? 

A.  Yes',  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  inspect  all  of  these  places  ? 

A.  I  did ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  your  fees  ought  to  be  $230,  according  to  law  ? 

A.  I  never  counted  it  up. 
55 


434 


Q.  How  much  did  youjeceive? 
A.  $85  in  all.    $2.50  in  each  case. 

Q.  Now,  Major  Linton  testified  that  he  and  you  had  an 
arrangement  whereby  3^ou  were  to  divide  the  amount  of  the 
Marshal's  fee  in  two  ? 

A.  Well,  all  the  arrangement  was  made  he  made  himself. 

Q.  He  was  the  sole  contractor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  did  not  hear  his  testimony,  but  I  saw  in  the 
papers  that  he  said  I  made  the  proposition  to  him.  That  is 
untrue.  I  never  made  any  proposition  of  the  kind.  I  was  in 
danger  all  the  time  and  consequently  I  was  very  cautious  what 
I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  any  notification  to  inspect  numerous 
places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  inspected  34  or  35,  or  more,  and  made  a 
report  to  him.  That  is  all  this  year,  1886.  He  has  the  re- 
ports if  he  has  not  destroyed  them.  I  made  report  in  34 
cases.  That  is  all  I  made  reports  of,  according  to  the  memor- 
andums I  have  here.  Some  I  didn't  make  a  memorandum  of. 
I  recollect  one  that  I  didn't  make  a  report  on,  which  has  not 
been  specified,  but  which  I  recollect.  It  was  on  Spring  Gar- 
den street,  above  Eleventh.  I  made  a  report  to  him  about 
that. 

Q.  Why  Avere  you  satisfied  to  take  $2.50  ? 

A.  Because  my  head  was  in  danger,  and  I  thought  it  was 
best  to  accept  it. 

Q.  Was  it  part  of  your  duty  to  report  to  the  Mayor  any- 
thing ? 

A.  Part  of  my  duty. 

Q.  Part  of  your  duty  to  report  to  the  Mayor  that  you  had 
examined  these  places  ? 

A.  I  made  a  report.  The  reports  I  made  are  addressed  to 
the  Mayor,  but  delivered  to  Major  Linton. 


435 


Q.  Did  you  acquaint  the  Mayor  with  this  proposition  of  his 
secretary  ? 
A.  I  did  not. 
Q.  Why? 

A.  I  don't  know  why  I  didn't  I  say  that  I  felt  that  my 
head  was  in  danger,  and  that  it  might  be  to-morrow  when  I 
was  to  go. 

Q.  How  was  it  last  year? 

A.  Last  year  I  never  was  called  upon  to  examine  but  one 
place. 

Q.  All  of  last  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  I  examined  and  made  a  report  about.  It 
was  at  the  corner  of  Branch  and  Third  streets.  The  man 
told  me  that  he  paid  $20  for  it. 

Q.  Did  you  get  your  fee  out  of  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  never  received  a  penny. 

Q.  But  he  paid  |20  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  he  told  me  that. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  he  paid  it  ? 
A.  No,  sir ;  only  as  he  told  me. 

.  Q.  When  the  secretary  to  the  Mayor  made  the  proposition 
as  you  say  to  divide  the  fees,  you  did  not  like  to  say  no,  be- 
cause you  felt  that  your  head  was  in  danger  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Didn't  you  think  that  it  was  your  duty  to  acquaint  the 
Mayor  with  that  proposition  ? 
A.  I  can't  say  that  I  did. 

Q.  And  you  never  did  acquaint  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  I  didn't.  The  Mayor  stated,  I  believe,  that  he  had  a 
conversation  with  me  in  reference  to  the  fees.  That  is  as  I 
understood  him.  We  never  had  a  conversation  in  relation  to 
the  fees.  We  never  had  a  word  about  it  in  anyway.  I  didn't 
submit  the  question  to  him  nor  he  to  me.  But  in  regard  to 
enforcing  the  law  concerning  these  people — about  collecting 


436 


the  $100  and  the  other  things — we  probably  had  two  or  three 
or  more  conversrtions. 

Mayor  Smith : 

Didn't  I  say  it  was  my  belief  it  was  impossible  to  enforce 
the  law  ? 
The  witness : 

You  didn't  say  you  were  adverse,  but  you  said  you  didn't 
believe  it  was  possible  to  enforce  the  law,  from  the  fact  that 
there  was  no  penalty  in  the  law,  other  than  the  forfeiture  of 
the  oil. 

Mr.  Rudiman: 

The  witness  has  said  that  he  made  reports  to  Major  Linton, 
and  stated  that  he  supposed  they  were  destroyed ;  has  the  wit- 
ness any  copies  of  those  reports  which  he  can  now  produce  ? 

A.  I  have  not. 

Q.  You  didn't  keep  any  copies  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  did  not  think  it  was  worth  while. 

Ey  Mr.  Edwards  : 

Q.  You  say  you  thought  your  head  was  in  danger,  and  that 
consequently  you  gave  the  $2.50. 

A.  It  was  rumored  that  I  was  going  to  be  discharged  and 
somebody  else  appointed,  and  Major  Linton  was  the  first  man 
to  give  me  a  definite  answer  upon  the  subject.  That  was  about 
the  time  they  commenced  the  collection  of  these  fees. 


John  L.  Linton^  recalled. 

(Certain  books  are  here  produced  by  the  witness.) 
Examination  by  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  Well,  what  have  you  to  say  about  this  book  (indicating 
a  book). 

A.  You  will  see  (referring  to  book)  that  Daniel  Rosenthal 


437 


executed  his  bond  on  the  fifth  day  of  January,  1886.  The 
bondsman  is  Mrs.  Elizabeth  Devine. 

Q.  Now  turn  to  Jacob  Rosenthal. 

A.  He  has  not  executed  any. 

Q.  Is  there  a  bond  there  for  Mrs.  Etta  Hymens  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Now,  what  are  those  other  books  (indicating  books)  ? 

A.  This  is  the  license  book  (indicating  book),  and  the  stubs 
will  show  the  names ;  and  you  see  that  the  auditors  have  ex- 
amined all  this  by  that  mark  there  which  they  made  (indi- 
cating a  mark). 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  That  was  for  1885  ? 
A.  1885  and  1886. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  What  is  this  book  (indicating  a  book)  ? 
A.  It  is  a  complete  list  of  the  pawnbrokers. 

Mr.  Clay :  I  move  that  the  Committee  now  go  into  Execu- 
tive Session. 

The  question  being  upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay, 

It  was  agreed  to. 
Whereupon  the  Committee  went  into  Executive  Session. 


FIFTH  DAY 


COMMON  COUNCIL  CHAMBER. 


Philadelphia,  September  9,  1886. 

The  Committee  re-assembled  at  5.30  o'clock  P.  M.,  this  day, 
in  the  Chamber  of  Common  Council,  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present : — Mr.  Roberts  in  the  Chair ;  Mr.  Eckstein,  Clerk, 
and  the  following  members  of  the  Committee — Messrs.  Ed- 
wards, Bardsley,  Iseminger,  Claridge,  Clay,  Reinstine,  and 
Lawrence,  President  of  Common  Council :  of  Counsel — Mr. 
Warwick,  the  City  Solicitor ;  Messrs.  Earle  and  White,  as 
representing  the  Mayor. 


Francis  C.  Van  Blank,  being  duly  sworn,  according  to  law, 
testified  as  follows : 

Mr.  Clay :  Before  the  testimony  of  this  witness  is  taken  it 
has  been  suggested  that  it  should  be  stated  what  we  are  about 
to  do,  in  order  that  Major  Linton  shall  have  notice  to  do  what- 
ever his  counsel  advises  him  to  do.  There  is  matter  before 
the  Committee  in  connection  with  the  Major,  and  which,  if 
proven,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Committee  and  in  the  estima- 
tion of  the  City  Solicitor,  will  criminate  him.    We  have  no 

(439) 


440 


desire  to  do  that,  but  certainly  this  statement  is  made  in  order 
that  the  Major,  through  his  counsel,  may  determine  whether  he 
will  come  upon  the  stand  or  not. 

Mr.  White  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor) :  I  think  that  the 
member  of  the  Committee,  who  has  just  spoken,  referred  to  us 
as  counsel  for  Major  Linton.  We  are  not  counsel  for  Major 
Linton,  and  I  do  not  know  of  any  proceedings  against  him. 
We  are  counsel  for  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  and  represent  him 
here  in  anything  concerning  him. 

Mr.  Clay  :  The  Committee  don't  desire  to  do  anything  that 
will  operate  against  the  Major,  but  we  do  want  to  get  a  full 
knowledge  of  the  transactions  in  which  he  has  been  concerned, 
touching  this  investigation. 

Mr.  White  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor) :  I  understand  that. 
I  have  nothing  to  do  with  such  action  of  the  Committee.  I 
simply  say  that  we  are  not  counsel  for  the  Major,  and  cannot 
take  any  responsibility  on  his  account,  or  give  advice  to  him ; 
nor  do  I  think  that  any  proceedings  here  touching  his  conduct 
affect  our  client,  the  Mayor. 

Mr.  Earle  (of  counsel  for  Mayor  Smith) :  If  you  think  the 
Major  ought  to  have  counsel,  I  w^ould  suggest  that  he  be  so 
notified,  and  that  he  be  given  an  opportunity  to  get  counsel. 
Certainly  we  are  not  his  counsel. 

Mr.  Clay  :  Well,  we  will  proceed  with  the  examination. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  (Addressing  the  witness.  Van  Blunk).  Where  do  you 
reside  ? 

A.  No.  1206  South  Sixth  street. 
Q.  That  is  your  residence  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  have  a  place  of  business  ? 
A.  It  is  there  also. 


441 


Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 
A..  I  am  a  real  estate  agents 
Q.  Do  you  know  John  L.  Linton  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  relation  have  you  with  him,  if  any  ? 
A.  He  is  the  lessee  of  a  house  I  am  the  agent  of. 
Q.  Located  where  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  you  the  number  at  present,  but  it  is  on 
Park  avenue  north  of  Diamond  street,  on  the  east  side. 
Q.  Did  you  ever  have  any  other  relations  with  him  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  collect  the  rents  of  that  house  from  him  ? 
A.  I  do. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  receive  money  from  him  for  any  other 
purpose  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Except  for  the  rent  of  the  house  he  occupies  as  tenant 
under  you  ? 
A.  That  is  all. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  this  check  ? 

(A  check  here  produced  and  shown  witness.) 

A.  No ;  I  cannot  say  that  I  do.    The  time  is  so  far  back. 

Q.  Look  on  the  back  of  the  check  and  tell  us  whether  you 
recognize  the  endorsement  ? 
A.  I  do.    It  is  mine. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  receive  that  check  from  ? 
A.  I  suppose  from  Mr.  Linton,  judging  by  the  signature 
and  my  endorsement. 

Q.  Did  any  other  person  ever  pay  you  the  rent  of  that 
house  ? 

A.  I  have  received  moneys  from  other  parties  for  him. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  his  signature  ? 
A.  I  cannot  say  positively  that  I  am. 
56 


442 


Q.  You  say  that  you  received  that  check  as  rent  of  the 
liouse  that  Major  Linton  occupies  ? 

A.  I  suppose  so.  I  would  accept  that  as  my  signature 
(indicating  signature  on  check),  but  it  is  dated  so  far  back. 

Q.  You  never  received  money  for  any  other  purpose  from 
Major  Linton  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  no  recollection  of  it,  and  I  don't  know 
that  I  did.  Our  business  relation  has  stood  as  landlord  and 
tenant — I  am  an  agent  and  he  is  the  lessee. 

Mr.  Clay  :  Does  Major  Linton  desire  to  say  anything  ? 

Major  Linton  :  I  am  not  represented  here  by  any  attorney, 
but  I  am  willing  to  take  the  stand  and  make  an  explanation 
:about  the  check,  by  permission  of  the  Committee. 

Mr.  Clay  :  Very  well ;  but  that  is  something  for  you  to  de- 
rtermine  yourself. 


■John  L.  Linton^  recalled. 

Mr.  Clay :  If  Major  Linton  is  going  to  take  the  stand, 
wouldn't  it  be  well  to  inform  him  that  he  need  not  testify  if  he 
does  not  want  to.  And  wouldn't  it  be  well  to  suggest  to  the 
City  Solicitor  that  he  should  instruct  him  as  to  his  rights  ? 

Mr.  Clay :  I  was  just  going  to  ask  that  that  should  be 
done. 

Mr.  Warwick  (the  City  Solicitor)  :  Major :  If  any  answer 
you  should  give  to  any  question  will  tend  to  criminate  you  in 
any  way,  you  need  not  answer  the  question — you  need  not 
answer  it. 

The  Witness :  I  am  willing  to  answer  all  questions  put  to 
me  with  reference  to  that  check.  I  am  perfectly  willing  to 
.answer. 


443 


By  Mr.  Claridge : 

Q.  Is  that  your  receipt? 

(A  paper  is  here  produced  and  shown  witness.) 
A.  It  is. 

Q.  Is  that  your  endorsement  on  the  check  ? 
(A  check  is  here  produced  and  shown  witness). 
A.  That  is  my  endorsement. 
Q.  Tell  us  whom  you  got  it  from  ? 

A.  I  got  it  from  the  Penn  Oil  Manufacturing  Company. 

Q.  Tell  us  why  it  was  paid  you  ? 

A.  For  a  license  of  a  wholesale  dealer. 

Q.  Didn't  you  state  to  this  committee  yesterday  that  you 
had  kept  in  your  possession  all  the  moneys  you  received  for 
licenses,  and  that  they  never  went  out  of  your  possession  ? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Can  you  explain  to  the  Committee  how  you  could  give 
that  testimony  and  yet  use  this  check  in  payment  of  your 
rent  ? 

A.  I  w^ill  explain  it  to  the  Committee  and  my  explanation 
will  cover  checks  of  this  sort  or  kind.  There  may  have  been 
others.  Usually  I  received  the  cash.  In  this  case  the  pay- 
ment was  by  a  check,  and,  to  save  myself  the  trouble  of  going 
to  bank  and  collecting  it,  I  paid  it  to  Mr.  Van  Blunk  as  cash 
on  account  of  my  rent,  besides  $20  in  cash.  My  warrant  for 
the  previous  month  had  not  yet  been  cashed.  It  was  to  save 
myself  the  trouble  of  collecting  this  check,  which  I  did  in  all 
cases  of  coal  oil  licenses,  take  them  to  bank  and  have  them 
cashed,  and  then  deposit  the  money  in  the  fire-proof.  The 
very  day  on  which  I  presented  this  check,  or  handed  it  to  Mr. 
Van  Blunk,  my  warrant  was  cashed  for  my  previous  month's 
pay,  and  then  I  took  $20  out  of  that,  which  this  check  repre- 
sents, and  placed  it  in  the  fire-proof,  together  with  the  other 
moneys  for  the  coal  oil  licenses.  That  is  my  truthful  expla- 
nation of  the  matter. 


444 


Mr.  Earle  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor).  As  this  is  an  in- 
vestigation of  the  Mayor,  I  think  the  witness  ought  to  be  asked 
whether  the  Mayor  had  any  knowledge  of  the  transaction. 

By  Mr.  Clay : 

Q.  Can  you  answer  that  question  as  stated  by  Mr.  Earle  ? 
A.  The  Mayor  had  no  knowledge  of  it. 
Q.  It  Avas  something  you  did  yourself? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  report  it  to  him, 

A.  No,  sir — I  didn't.  The  money  on  the  same  day  went 
into  the  fire  proof  with  the  other  moneys  collected  for  coal  oil 
licenses,  in  the  same  manner  I  have  represented. 

Q.  What  did  you  mean  when  you  said  that  this  money  was 
never  used  in  any  way  by  anybody — neither  by  the  Mayor,, 
yourself,  or  by  anybody  else  ? 

A.  I  mean  just  wdiat  I  said. 

Q.  And  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  you  used  this  check  t 

A.  It  was  a  matter  of  simply  going  to  bank  and  drawing 
the  money  and  placing  it  in  the  fire  proof.  Probably  within 
from  fifteen  to  twenty  minutes  afterwards  the  warrant  was 
cashed  and  the  money  was  placed  in  the  safe.  It  saved  me 
the  trouble  of  going  and  getting  the  cash. 

Q.  On  what  day  of  the  month  is  the  rent  due  ? 

A.  On  the  first  of  the  month. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  pay  it  before  it  is  due  ? 

A.  Never.    Yes — I  have  paid  it  in  advance. 

Q.  You  have  an  account  in  the  Provident  Life  and  Trust 
Company  ? 

A.  I  have. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  other  checks  of  this  kind  which 
you  received  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  If  I  turned  them  into  cash  that  way  I 
immediately  placed  the  cash  in  the  fire-proof — always.  I 
never  allowed  the  banking  hour  to  go  over. 


445 


Q.  What  was  the  object  of  your  keeping  an  account  in  the 
Provident  Trust  Company  ? 

A.  I  have  some  money  belonging  to  my  wife,  and  I  have  a 
small  income,  myself,  from  my  father's  estate. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley  : 

Q.  At  what  time  in  the  month  did  you  pay  the  rent  that 
this  check  was  a  part  of  ? 

A.  On  that  same  day.  I  didn't  want  the  agent  to  call  the 
second  time  for  the  rent.  I  didn't  have  cash  enough  of  my 
own  at  the  time — only  $10.  I  gave  him  the  check  in  order 
to  relieve  him  from  coming  another  time  for  the  money. 

Q.  On  the  25th  of  February  you  paid  the  rent  and  this 
check  was  part  of  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Sometimes  I  paid  it  later  in  the  month,  and 
sometimes  earlier. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  a  few  minutes  ago,  as  to  how  soon 
afterwards  you  received  your  warrant  ? 

A.  About  the  first  of  the  month. 

Q.  But  what  did  you  say  a  few  moments  ago,  as  to  when 
you  received  your  warrant  after  this  transaction  ?  Did  you 
say  a  few  days  ? 

A.  No.  The  check  is  dated  February  25th.  I  held  that 
•check.  It  was  not  drawn,  not  presented  for  payment  until 
the  date  of  the  payment  of  the  rent,  which  I  think  Avas  paid  at 
the  beginning  of  the  month.  I  held  this  check  without  pre- 
senting it  to  the  bank  and  paid  it  to  Mr.  Van  Blunk  as  part  of 
my  rent.    That  is  the  way  it  occurred. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say,  a  few  moments  ago,  that  you 
paid  it  to  Mr.  Van  Blunk  on  the  day  it  is  dated  ? 
A.  I  didn't  say  that. 

Q.  Didn't  you  say  that  a  few  minutes  ago  ? 

A.  From  the  date  of  the  check  I  am  convinced,  in  my  own 
mind,  that  I  held  it  several  days,  until  probably  after  the  first 
of  the  month. 


446 


Q.  Didn't  you  tell  this  Committee,  a  few  minutes  ago,  that 
you  paid  it  to  Mr.  Van  Blunk  on  the  day  it  is  dated  ?  ^ 
A.  No,  sir.    You  misunderstood  me. 
Q.  When  did  you  pay  it  to  Mr.  Van  Blunk  ? 
A.  Upon  the  first  of  the  following  month. 
Q.  About  the  first  of  March  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    I  held  it  from  the  tw^enty-fifth  until  about 
the  first,  or  second,  or  third  of  the  month. 
Q.  Of  March? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  do  you  get  your  warrants  ? 

A.  On  the  first  of  the  month.  Sometimes  on  the  day  or 
the  evening  before. 

Q.  Sometimes  on  the  last  day  of  the  month  and  sometimes 
on  the  first  of  the  month  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  Then  what  object  could  you  have  in  usiing  this  check  at 
all  in  the  way  you  have  stated  ? 

A.  I  have  explained  that.  My  warrant  Avas  not  cashed.  It 
was  there  on  my  desk  at  the  time.  On  the  very  day  I  paid 
my  rent  my  warrant  was  there.  W^hen  I  used  that  check  as 
part  payment — on  that  very  day,  that  identical  day,  my  war- 
rant was  cashed  and  the  $20  or  the  $10,  were  placed  in  the 
fire-proof  where  the  money  belonged. 

Q.  Why  did  you  use  it  ? 

A.  Only  as  a  matter  of  convenience  to  myself — instead  of 
going  to  bank  and  drawing  it. 

Q.  Then  it  was  about  the  same  day  you  got  your  warrant 
cashed  ? 

A.  I  have  already  said  that  on  the  very  same  day  I  paid  my 
rnet  my  warrant  was  cashed,  and  the  $20  or  the  $10  were 
placed  in  the  fire-proof. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say,  now,  that  within  a  few  minutes 
afterwards  you  got  your  warrant  cashed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


447 


Q.  "What  did  you  say  you  did  with  similar  checks  ? 

A.  If  I  received  any  others,  some  Avere  drawn  from  the 
bank,  and  I  may  have  placed  the  cash  in  the  fire  proof,  or  I 
may  have  taken  them  myself. 

Q.  Didn't  the  majority  of  the  wholesale  dealers  pay  in 
checks  ? 

A.  I  am  not  sure  of  that.  I  think  a  great  many  paid  cash. 
I  don't  recollect. 

Q.  When  you  received  a  check  you  went  to  bank  and  drew 
it? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  or  if  I  cashed  it  the  money  was  placed  in  the 
safe.    I  may  have  placed  it  in  my  own  account. 
Q.  How  do  you  mean  ? 
A.  In  the  Provident  account. 

Q.  Sometimes,  then,  you  deposited  these  checks  in  the 
Provident  ? 

A.  If  I  cashed  them  I  placed  them  there.  But  if,  cashed 
them  I  placed  the  money  were  it  belonged,  in  the  fire  proof. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  to  Mr.  Clay  that  you  only  used 
the  Provident  account  for  private  matters  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  for  myself  and  wife. 

Q.  You  were  in  the  habit  of  using  or  depositing  these 
checks  ? 

A.  I  cashed  them  myself  if  I  had  the  money  and  took  the 
check  and  deposited  it  and  placed  the  money  in  the  fire  proof. 

Q.  Then  you  would  deposit  the  checks  and  draw  the  money 
from  the  Provident  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  mean  if  I  had  the  cash  on  hand  I  would  in- 
variably cash  the  check  and  place  the  money  in  the  fire  proof, 
and  then  take  the  check  and  get  it  cashed.  And  I  paid  the 
Fire  Marshal's  fees  before  I  took  the  check  myself. 

Q.  How  much  did  the  Fire  Marshal  get  out  of  this  check  ? 

A.  Five  dollars. 

Q.  And  you  got  five  dollars. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


448 


Q.  And  the  city  got  ten  dollars  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  deposit  all  or  nearly  all  of  the  checks  of  this 
character  in  the  Provident  account  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  nearly  all  of  them  I  sent  and  had  them  drawn. 
It  was  very  seldom  it  occurred  in  any  other  way.  If  I  had 
the  money  I  would  do  it  in  that  way  in  order  to  settle  with 
the  Fire  Marshal,  which  I  did,  regularly,  on  the  following 
morning. 

Q.  You  did  not  keep  his  money,  at  any  rate  ?  You  paid 
him  every  morning  ? 

A.  I  did.  I  settled  with  him  daily  for  the  previous  day's 
work. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Mr.  Wood's  testimony  last  evening? 
A.  I  did,  and  it  was  false. 

Q.  You  say  it  was  false  ? 

A.  Most  positively  fake.  I  paid  him  daily,  and  he  was 
very  prompt  in  calling  for  it. 

Q.  Every  morning  ?  ♦ 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  you  didn't  get  a  chance  very  often  to  deposit  in  the 
Provident  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  never  used  the  checks  in  that  way.  I  pre- 
ferred not  to  have  the  use  of  one  cent  of  the  city's  money  in 
my  own  private  account. 

Q.  That  is  what  you  testified  to  yesterday,  very  distinctly 
and  emphatically,  and  that  is  why  I  have  called  your  attention 
to  the  matter  ? 

A.  The  facts  of  the  transaction  as  they  occurred  in  connec- 
tion with  this  check  may  have  occurred  with  any  ordinary 
business  man.    They  do  occur — they  occur  constantly. 

Q.  There  was  no  intention  of  using  the  money  ?  You 
never  did  use  any  of  these  moneys  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 


449 


By  Mr.  Edwards  : 

Q.  How  often  did  you  pay  your  rent,  monthly  or  quarterly  ? 
A.  Monthly. 

Q.  Ever  in  advance  ? 

A.  Sometimes  in  advance. 

Q.  What  was  your  monthly  rent  ? 
A.  Thirty  dollars. 

Q.  What  does  the  house  rent  for  ? 

A.  Thirty  dollars  a  month.    I  have  been  in  it  for  nearly 
ten  years. 

Q.  How  did  you  pay  the  balance  of  that  rent  ? 

A.  By  cash  out  of  my  pocket.  I  made  it  up  in  that  way 
in  order  to  save  the  agent  from  calling  a  second  time  for  his 
rent.  It  was  done  in  that  way.  It  is  something  that  you 
gentlemen,  and  all  of  you  are  business  men,  will  understand. 
I  did  it  to  save  myself  the  trouble  of  collecting  the  check,  and 
to  accommodate  the  agent,  who  called  for  the  rent.  Inside  of 
fifteen  minutes  afterwards  I  received  my  warrant.  My  war- 
rant was  cashed.  It  was  lying  in  front  of  me  at  the  table. 
Then  the  amount  of  $10  was  placed  in  the  fire-proof,  together 
with  the  other  moneys  from  the  coal  oil  licenses. 

Q.  What  was  the  manner  of  paying  your  rent  ?    When  it 
was  due  ?    What  was  done  by  you  and  the  agent  ?    Did  you  ■ 
go  to  him  to  pay  the  rent,  or  did  he  call  for  it  ? 

A.  He  would  call  for  it  ? 

Q.  Where  would  he  call  for  it  ? 

A.  Sometimes  at  the  house  and  sometimes  at  the  office. 
Before  I  occupied  that  office  it  was  generally  at  the  house. 

Q.  Where  was  the  rent  paid  on  the  occasion  that  this  check 
was  used  ? 

A.  At  my  desk  in  my  room. 

Q.  Where  was  this  check  at  the  time  ? 
A.  Lying  in  front  of  me. 
57 


450 


Q.  In  your  room  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  on  the  desk  ;  but  I  may  have  taken  it 
out  of  the  fire-proof.    I  cannot  tell  about  that. 

Q.  What  did  you  do,  as  a  rule,  with  money  for  licenses 
when  they  came  in  your  possession  ? 

A.  Invariably  placed  them  in  the  fire-proof. 

Q.  You  did  not  always  keep  them  there,  like  Mr.  March  ? 
A.  I  don't  understand  you. 

Q.  You  did  not  always  keep  the  money  in  the  safe  ?  You 
put  it  in  the  safe,  but  you  did  not  leave  it  remain  there  ? 

A.  Y^es,  sir ;  all  the  time.  Every  dollar  I  received  for  coal 
oil  licenses  and  for  amusement  licenses  and  gunpowder  licenses 
which  Avas  not  paid  over  to  the  City  Treasurer,  was  kept 
sacred  in  the  fire-proof. 

Q.  You  knew  that  this  was  city  money? 
A.  Not  all  of  it ;  ten  dollars  of  it  only  ;  the  other  was  the 
Fire  Marshal's. 

Q.  You  knew  you  had  collected  those  ten  dollars,  payable 
on  a  check.  Did  you  hold  that  sum  for  the  use  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  ? 

A.  Well,  there  was  my  warrant ;  and  it  did  not  exceed  thirty 
minutes — it  may  have  been  only  fifteen  minutes — before  the 
warrant  was  cashed,  and  the  money  was  then  placed  where  it 
belonged. 

Q.  How  many  checks  of  this  kind  did  you  deposit  in  the 
Provident  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  whether  I  ever  did  before.  I  may  have. 
If  I  did,  the  cash  was  paid  into  the  fire-proof  in  lieu  of  the 
checks  always.  I  want  you  to  distinctly  understand  that  this 
is  the  truth,  under  my  oath,  in  reference  to  the  matter. 


451 


By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman  : 

Q.  Did  you  ever  carry  such  checks  for  several  days  before 
you  used  them  ? 

A.  I  may  have  done  so.  Doubtless,  by  the  date  of  it,  it 
was  done  in  this  case.  The  Fire  Marshal  was  settled  A^ith  the 
following  morning. 

Q.  But  the  bank  was  so  near  that  it  would  have  seemed  to 
be  better  for  you  to  go  and  draw  it.  Suppose,  for  instance, 
that  man  had  died? 

A.  Well,  probably  it  would  have  been  better.    I  see  it  now. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence  : 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  give  your  own  private  check  for  this 
money  ? 

A.  The  reason  was  that  I  had  my  warrant  before  me,  and 
expected  every  moment  that  it  w^ould  be  cashed.  That  is  why 
I  did  not  do  it. 

Q.  You  have  referred  to  ordinary  business  men.  Do  any 
business  men,  as  a  rule,  give  their  own  checks  in  payment  .of 
bills  ?  I  never  would  think  of  giving  a  man  a  check  paid  to 
me.  I  would  give  him  my  check  and  deposit  a  check  payable 
to  me  ? 

A.  That  w^ould  be,  probably,  the  best  course  to  pursue.  But 
I  am  not  idle  in  the  office.  I  was  very  busy,  probably,  at  this 
very  time.  I  don't  recollect  the  exact  time,  but  I  know  that 
in  order  to  save  my  time  and  to  save  the  agent  trouble  I  did  i-t 
in  this  way. 

Q.  When  you  said  "my  room,"  you  meant  the  office? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  had  this  check  in  front  of  you  on  the 
desk  ? 

A.  Either  I  had  it  before  me  on  the  desk,  or  I  took  it  from 
the  fire  proof. 


452 


Q.  And  the  way  you  came  to  take  it  was  because  it 
pened  to  be  in  front  of  you  ? 

A.  It  was  the  only  check  I  had  on  hand  at  the  time.  I 
don't  know  whether  I  took  it  from  the  fire  proof  or  whether  it 
was  before  me. 

By  Mr.  Roberts,  Chairman : 

Q.  How  much  longer  would  you  have  kept  it  if  the  agent 
had  not  called  ? 

A.  Only  to  the  end  of  the  month,  at  any  rate. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley : 

Q.  Why  do  you  say  "only  to  the  end  of  the  month?" 

A.  Because  at  the  end  of  every  month  I  count  the  money 
over  to  see  that  it  corresponds  with  my  memorandum  of  cash. 

Q.  Then  you  did  keep  memorandums  of  cash  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  a  book  ? 

A.  No,  sir :  They  were  little  slips — designating  the  parties 
who  had  paid,  and  where  they  resided  and  what  the  money  was 
paid  for. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  those  little  slips  ? 

A.  When  I  settled  the  account  I  had  no  more  use  for  them. 

Q.  With  whom  did  you  settle  ? 

A.  With  the  Mayor. 

Q.  When  did  you  settle  with  the  Mayor  ? 
A.  I  gave  him  the  money  the  day  he  paid  it  into  the  City 
Treasury. 

Q.  How  long  had  you  had  that  money  ? 

A.  It  was  a  small  amount— 1300  or  $400  or  $500.  I  had 
it  from  the  middle  of  January,  a  small  portion  of  it,  and  then 
it  increased  as  time  run  on. 

Q.  So  you  carried  those  little  slips  from  January  until  you 
paid  the  money  to  the  Mayor  and  he  paid  it  into  the  Treasury, 
some  time  in  August  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


453 


Q.  Did  you  carry  those  slips  around  with  you  from  January 
to  August  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  did  you  carry  them  ? 

A.  On  a  file. 

Q.  They  were  just  little  slips  in  front  of  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Those  were  your  only  memorandums  ? 

A.  I  entered  them  in  the  coal  oil  book. 

Q.  What  is  that  ? 

A.  I  entered  them  also  in  the  coal  oil  book,  the  wholesale 
and  retail  dealers  which  I  have  at  the  office. 

Q.  You  entered  the  receipts  in  that  book  ? 

A.  I  entered  the  daily  payments  made  to  me  in  that  book, 
and  I  also  kept  memorandums  w^hich  I  destroyed  after  the  set- 
tlements were  made. 

Q.  Why  did  you  keep  memorandums  of  them  ? 
A.  I  don't  know  ;  but  as  a  sort  of  a  check,  one  against  the 
other. 

Q.  It  w^as  a  check  upon  yourself,  and  when  you  made  the 
entries  from  the  slips  into  the  book  you  didn't  have  any  further 
use  for  the  slips  ? 

A.  No  further  use. 

Q.  Still  you  held  on  to  them  ? 

A.  I  destroyed  them  when  the  moneys  were  paid  into  the 
City  Treasury.    I  no  longer  had  any  use  for  them. 

Q.  I  understand  you  that  this  check  was  either  on  your 
desk  or  in  the  safe  the  day  you  paid  your  rent,  and  that  you 
took  $10  more  than  the  amount  of  the  check  and  put  those 
$10  to  it.    May  I  ask  you  were  you  got  the  f  10  from  ? 

A.  I  took  them  from  my  pocket. 

Q.  Not  from  the  safe  ? 
A.  No. 


454 


Q.  But  you  had  money  from  the  gafe  ? 
A.  I  had  the  whole  of  the  money. 

Q.  Did  you  only  take  the  check  from  the  safe  and  leave  the 
money  there  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  difference  would  it  have  made  if  you  had  taken 
$10  in  notes  from  the  safe  instead  of  taking  the  check  out  ? 
A.  I  wanted  to  have  the  check  collected. 

Q.  You  wanted  to  save  the  trouble  of  depositing  it  in  the 
Provident.  You  had  been  waiting  several  days  with  it  when 
the  agent  called  upon  you— about  the  first  or  second  or  third 
of  the  month.  He  happened  to  call  the  same  day  you  got 
your  warrant.  Had  you  been  keeping  this  check  waiting  for 
him  to  call  upon  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Had  he  called  before  to  see  you  ? 
A.  I  don't  think  he  had. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  he  had  ? 

A.  I  don't  recollect.    He  can  answer  that  question  himself. 

By  Mr.  Edwards : 

Q.  Are  you  in  the  habit  of  taking  receipts  for  your  rent  ? 
A.  Always. 

Q.  Have  you  a  receipt  for  this  rent  ? 
A.  I  have  it  at  home,  but  not  here. 

By  Mr.  Clay  : 

Q.  You  recollect  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Lovatt.  He  testified 
that  he  was  present  the  day  Etta  Hymens  paid  you  $100  for 
a  license,  and  he  fixed  his  presence  from  the  fact  of  seeing  her 
execute  a  bond  at  the  time  the  payment  was  made.  If  you 
recollect  your  testimony  yesterday,  it  was  to  the  effect  that 
Etta  Hymens  had  never  signed  a  bond. 

A.  I  don't  recollect  that  I  said  that. 


455 


Q.  You  have  found  the  bond  of  Mr.  Rosenthal  but  not  the 
bond  of  Mrs.  Etta  Hymens  ? 

A.  I  didn't  look  for  it ;  you  told  me  about  Mr.  Rosenthal 
and  I  found  Mr.  Rosenthal's  for  you. 

Q.  Didn't  you  testify  that  there  was  no  bond  in  this  book 
(indicating  bond  book)  in  favor  of  that  Avoman? 
A.  No,  sir  ;  I  don't  recollect  that  I  did. 

(The  book  is  here  exhibited  to  witness  and  a  certain  bond 
pointed  out  to  him.) 

The  witness  :  That  is  the  bond  of  Etta  Hymens,  but  it  is 
cancelled. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  that  ? 

A.  When  she  called  to  see  me  in  reference  to  her  license, 
she  said  she  didn't  expect  to  be  in  business  long — that  she  ex- 
pected to  go  out  of  business,  but  that  she  would  give  her  bond. 
That  is  all  that  occurred.  Then  she  notified  me  about  going 
out  of  business  and  I  returned  her  policy  of  insurance  ? 

Q.  But  what  about  her  money 

A.  I  have  no  recollection  of  any  payment  of  money  to  me, 
unless  it  is  on  the  list  Avhich  you  have.  I  have  no  memo- 
randum, no  knowledge,  no  nothing  that  she  ever  paid  the 
money.  The  reason,  I  think,  was  very  likely  because  she  was 
going  out  of  business. 

Q.  So  that  it  would  have  been  of  no  particular  use  to  her 
to  do  it  ? 

A.  I  expect  that  she  thought  it  was  of  importance  for  her 
to  at  once  execute  her  bond.  I  told  her  that.  I  told  them  all 
that.  I  told  them  that  if  they  kept  their  doors  open  they  must 
have  their  bonds  executed. 

Q.  Didn't  you  tell  her  also  that  it  was  equally  necessary  to 
have  a  policy  of  insurance  filed  ? 

A.  That  she  did.  When  she  went  out  of  business  she  save 
me  notice  and  I  sent  her  the  policy  of  insurance. 


456 


Q.  Well,  we  have  testimony  before  the  Committee  that  cer- 
tain parties  saw  her  pay  the  money  ? 

A.  I  had  no  memoranda,  no  nothing  that  she  paid  the 
money.    If  she  paid  it  it  is  in  the  book,  which  is  here. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence. 

Q.  Did  you  yesterday  disclaim  all  knowledge  of  Etta 
Hymens  ? 

A.  It  was  on  account  of  her  going  out  of  business  when 
the  bond  was  cancelled  and  the  policy  returned. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley. 

Q.  Now,  that  bond  is  here  (indicating  a  book),  you  might 
have  told  us  that  ? 

A.  Well,  it  was  cancelled  and  was  not  in  existence.  That 
was  my  meaning. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  tell  this  Committee  that  you  wanted  us 
to  infer  that  you  knew  she  had  a  bond  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  didn't  recollect  the  case  at  all  at  the  time  I 
gave  that  testimony. 

Q.  Now,  this  is  the  lady  who  told  her  friend  that  she  had 
not  paid  you  the  five  dollars.  Perhaps  that  will  bring  it  to 
your  mind  ? 

A.  Her  money  is  not  there.  And  all  the  parties  who  paid 
have  their  names  entered  in  this  book  (indicating  a  book). 
I  was  asked  the  question  if  there  was  a  bond  for  Etta  Hymens. 
It  was  my  error  in  saying  that  she  had  not  given  a  bond.  She 
had  given  it,  but  she  went  out  of  business,  and  we  cancelled  it. 

By  Mr.  Lawrence : 

Q.  Were  you  not  handed  a  slip  yesterday,  containing  the 
name  of  this  lady  asked  to  furnish  the  Committee  with  infor- 
mation as  to  whether  she  had  filed  a  bond  or  not  ? 

A.  Etta  Hymens'  name  was  not  on  the  list  given  me.  Mr. 
Rosenthal's  name  was  on  it.  I  tore  up  the  memorandum  to- 
day, but  I  have  the  torn  pieces  in  my  waste  basket. 


457 


Q.  When  this  book  was  brought  before  the  Committee  by 
you  (indicating  a  book)  you  exhibited  the  bond  of  Daniel 
Rosenthal,  and  made  a  positive  assertion  that  Mrs.  Etta  Hy- 
mens had  not  filed  any  bond  ? 

A.  I  didn't  make  a  positive  assertion.  I  was  asked  by  some- 
body whether  her  bond  was  given.  Somebody  back  of  me 
said  that  there  was  no  bond  of  hers. 

By  Mr.  Bardsley: 
Q.  Who  said  that  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  who.  Somebody  back  of  me  said  it,  and 
my  impression  was  that  there  was  no  bond ;  but  her  bond  is 
here  undoubtedly  (referring  to  the  book).  I  made  a  thorough 
examination  with  regard  to  Etta  Hymens,  and  I  can  find 
nothing  that  designates  that  she  paid  her  license. 

By  Mr.  Roberts  (Chairman.) 

Q.  Did  you  ever  balance  your  cash  to  see  whether  it  agreed 
with  your  slips  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  go  all  over  it — I  do  that  every  month. 
And  the  moment  the  Mayor  told  me  to  bring  the  money  into 
him,  I  brought  the  whole  into  him. 

By  Mr.  Reinstine : 

Q.  You  have  stated  before  the  Committee,  that  Mrs.  Hymens 
came  to  you  and  gave  you  notice  that  she  was  going  out  of 
business  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  upon  her  saying  so  you  cancelled  the  bond  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  was  that  ? 

A.  I  don't  remember  the  date ;  but  the  policies  were  sent 
for  and  handed  to  her.  In  her  case  her  policies  were  trans- 
ferred to  the  Mayor,  which  was  an  error  of  the  Insurance 
Company,  and  it  was  necessary  for  me  to  go  to  the  Company 
and  get  them  re-transferred,  and  he  had  to  sign  the  re-transfer 
58 


458 


Q,  Is  it  not  the  law  that  pawnbrokers  have  to  keep  goods 
for  a  certain  length  of  time  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  that  she  did  any  business  whatever. 

Q.  But  she  did  business  in  December.  She  had  to  keep 
the  goods  for  four  or  six  months — didn't  she  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  what  the  law  is. 

Q.  She  had  a  place  open  and  was  doing  business  and  re- 
ceiving deposits  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  she  did  any  business. 

Q.  She  was  doing  business  in  December,  and  if  she  didn't 
take  out  a  license  in  January  she  couldn't  deliver  the  goods? 

A.  Well,  I  don't  know  about  the  law. 

Mr.  White  (of  counsel  for  the  Mayor).  Whilst  I  am  not 
counsel  for  Major  Linton  I  think  it  is  only  right  and  just, 
regarding  him,  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Committee  to  some- 
thing they  may  have  overlooked.  As  I  understand  it,  this 
check  in  question  Avas  given  to  cover  two  payments — one  to 
City  and  one  to  the  Fire  Marshal.  Now — this  is  the  point  I 
make  —not  a  dollar  of  that  belonged  to  either,  until  the  money 
was  so  appropriated.  Of  necessity,  this  man  must  have  made 
a  division.  It  was  his  duty  in  getting  a  check  for  $20,  in 
some  way  to  cash  the  check  and  give  half  of  the  proceeds  to 
each  of  the  persons  entitled  to  them — not  half  of  the  check. 
He  couldn't  do  it  otherwise. 

Upon  motion  the  Committee  now  adjourns. 


REPORT. 


To  the  President  and  Members  of  Common  Council 

of  the  City  of  Philadelphia, 

Gentlemen  : — The  Committee  appointed  under  the  resolu- 
tion of  September  2,  1886,  to  investigate  accusations  against 
Hon.  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  Philadelphia,  and  the  man- 
agement of  the  department  under  him,  respectfully  reports 
that,  on  September  4,  1886,  a  meeting  was  called  in  the 
Select  Council  Chamber,  in  pursuance  of  said  resolution,  for 
the  purpose  of  taking  testimony  in  relation  to  said  charges.  A 
number  of  witnesses  had  been  subpoenaed,  and  were  about  to  be 
called,  when  Mr.  Bardsley,  a  member  of  the  Committee,  arose 
and  invited  the  gentlemen  who  represented  his  Honor,  the 
Mayor  to  make  any  statements  that  they  might  deem  proper, 
looking  to  the  refutation  of  any  of  the  charges.  Mr.  Ruddi- 
man,  of  counsel  for  his  Honor,  the  Mayor,  then  handed  to  the 
Committee  a  letter,  dated  September  3,  1886.  addressed  to 
Charles  Roberts,  Esq.,  Chairman,  and  members  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Investigation,  which  letter  is  printed  in  full,  and 
will  be  found  on  page  7  of  the  testimony  taken  in  the  case, 
and  presented  with  this  report.  The  first  witnesses  who  were 
called  were  the  pawnbrokers,  whose  names  had  been  furnished 
to  the  Committee.  They  testified  that  they  had  each  paid  to 
Major  John  L.  Linton,  the  Secretary  of  the  Mayor,  $100  for 
licenses,  for  1885  and  1886,  as  required  under  the  ordinance 

(459) 


460 


of  February  16,  1856,  sect.  1.  A  number  of  these  witnesses 
testified  that  they  had  paid  these  fees  by  check. 

A.  J.  McGarry  produced  five  checks.  The  first,  No.  461, 
dated  January  3,  1885,  on  the  Penn  National  Bank,  to  the 
order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  or  bearer,  for  $100,  signed  A.  J. 
McGarry.  Endorsed  "  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer."  De- 
posit to  the  credit  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer.  Mr.  Mc- 
Garry stated  that  when  the  check  was  originally  presented  to 
the  said  Secretary  of  the  Mayor  the  words  "  Or  bearer,"  in 
print,  were  stricken  out.  In  answer  to  the  question — Were 
the  words  stricken  out  by  you  ?"  he  replied,  "  Yes,  sir."  He 
was  then  asked,  "  But  the  words,  '  Or  bearer,'  in  writing,  were 
inserted;  was  that  by  you?"  He  answered,  "That  is  not 
my  handwriting,"  and  further  stated  that  it  was  not  done  with 
his  knowledge  or  consent.  See  pages  of  the  printed  testimony 
27  to  30. 

Check  No.  92,  of  date  January  3,  1885,  to  the  order  of 
the  City  Treasurer,  or  bearer,  $100,  signed  Harvey  &  Mc- 
Garry, and  endorsed  "  William  B.  Smith,  deposit  to  the  credit 
of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer."  The  testimony  in  relation 
to  this  w^as  the  same  as  that  in  regard  to  the  previous  check. 
Three  other  checks  were  handed  to  the  witness,  dated  January 
6.  1886.  Two  of  them,  Nos.  8  and  9,  were  on  the  National 
Bank  of  the  Northern  Liberties,  payable  to  William  B.  Smith, 
or  order,  $100,  signed  A.  J.  McGarry,  and  endorsed  "De- 
posit to  the  credit  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer."  The 
other  check,  No.  121,  dated  January  6,  1886,  on  the  Penn, 
National  Bank,  payable  to  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  or 
order,  $100,  signed  Harvey  &  McGarry.  Endorsed  "  Deposit 
to  the  credit  of  William  B  Smith,  Treasurer."  The  witness 
testified  that  the  checks  were  handed  by  him  to  the  Secretary 


461 


of  the  Mayor,  and  that  originally  they  were  drawn  to  the 
order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  and  that  without  his  knowledge, 
or  any  authority  from  him,  the  name  "William  B.  Smith" 
was  written  in  the  body  of  the  checks  after  they  left  his  hands. 
(See  Testimony  pages  29,  et  seq.) 

It  was  further  shown  in  testimony  that  in  many  instances 
in  1886,  even  when  the  conditions  of  the  ordinance  were  com- 
plied with,  the  licenses  were  not  issued  for  many  months  after 
the  payment  of  the  fees,  and  the  testimony  showed  that  in 
1885  in  many  cases  licenses  were  not  issued  until  December  of 
that  year.  It  was  further  in  evidence  that  upon  the  fifth  day 
of  January,  1886,  a  fee  of  $100  for  a  license  was  paid  by 
Daniel  Rosenthal,  a  pawnbroker,  who  at  that  time  was  in 
business  at  1127  Poplar  street,  and  in  the  return  made  by  the 
Mayor  to  the  City  Controller  and  City  Treasurer  no  such 
amount  for  such  a  purpose  is  accounted  for. 

In  another  case  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Committee, 
Thomas  B.  Lovett,  residing  at  No.  224  Lombard  street,  testi- 
ified  that  he  was  in  Major  Linton's  office  the  morning  that 
Mrs.  Etta  Hymens  came  to  pay  her  license ;  that  he  saw  her 
go  to  Major  Linton,  and  saw  her  bondsman  sign  the  bond, 
and  saw  her  take  out  her  pocketbook  and  take  money  out  of 
it,  but  that  then  his  attention  was  directed  to  another  part  of 
the  room,  and  he  supposed,  of  course,  that  she  paid  the 
money.  He  admitted  that  he  did  not  see  her  give  the  money 
to  Major  Linton,  but  saw  her  take  the  money  out  of  her  porte- 
monnaie.  After  that  he  walked  down  the  street  with  her  as 
far  as  Walnut  street,^and  she  made  a  remark  that  satisfied 
him  that  she  had  paid  the  money.  This  fee  is  not  accounted 
for  by  the  Mayor  in  his  return  to  the  Controller.  Briefly, 
then,  the  testimony  above  referred  to  shows  that  money  for 


462 


license  fees  as  received  at  the  Mayor's  office  in  the  years  1885 
and  1886  ;  that  the  fees  was  sometimes  paid  by  checks,  and 
that  several  of  the  checks  were  altered  by  some  one  in  the 
office  of  the  Mayor,  without  authority  and  not  in  the  presence 
of  the  makers ;  that  those  checks,  so  altered,  were  endorsed 
by  the  Mayor,  "William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,"  to  correspond 
with  the  alterations  made  in  the  bodies  of  the  checks,  and  by 
the  said  "  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor,"  deposited  to  his  own 
account  with  the  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust,  and  Safe  Deposit 
Company  ;  that  in  many  instances  the  conditions  required  by 
the  ordinance  of  the  city  were  complied  with  upon  the  part  of 
the  pawnbrokers,  and  that  the  licenses  of  the  said  pawnbrokers 
were  not  issued  in  1885  until  the  close  of  the  year,  and  in 
1886  not  until  months  after  the  fees  were  paid,  and  by  reason 
of  this  negligence  the  said  pawnbrokers  were  allowed  unlaw- 
fully to  conduct  their  business  in  this  city  in  violation  of  the 
provisions  of  the  act  of  February  24,  1859. 

It  was  further  shown  that  even  after  the  payments  of  the 
fees,  in  many  instances,  the  conditions  required  by  law  were 
not  exacted  by  the  Mayor. 

The  Committee  then  called  witnesses  in  reference  to  the 
charges  against  the  Mayor  to  his  use  of  these  moneys  for  his 
own  purposes. 

Robert  M.  Scott,  the  general  bookkeeper  of  the  Fidelity 
Insurance,  Trust,  and  Safe  Deposit  Company,  testified  that  he 
had  charge  of  the  account  of  William  B.  Smith,  "  Treasurer," 
that  the  account  had  been  in  that  shape  since  December  8, 
1880.  The  said  William  B.  Smith  also  had  an  account  as 
"  Trustee,"  to  the  credit  of  which  no  deposit  was  made  since 
the  28d  of  June,  1882.  That  as  to  the  account  of  William  B. 
Smith,  "  Treasurer,"  it  appeared  that  on  February  4,  1885, 


463 


the  balance  to  his  credit  was  $2,929.10,  and  that  the  first  item 
to  his  credit,  under  date  of  February  4th,  is  interest  to  the 
amount  of  §9.27  on  the  average  balance  at  2  per  cent,  per 
annum  for  the  previous  six  months.  On  the  5th  of  August 
another  balance  is  struck  showing  ?6,714.10  to  his  credit,  and 
on  the  same  day  is  passed  to  his  credit  $14.76  interest.  The 
witness  was  then  asked  as  to  the  condition  of  this  account  on 
the  1st  of  July  of  this  year.  The  answer  was  that  the  Mayor 
had  a  balance  to  his  credit  of  $2,354.06,  and  on  the  15th  of 
July  it  was  $1,135.73  ;  on  the  24th  of  July  it  was  $754.47, 
and  on  the  28th  of  July,  $5.27  ;  on  the  30th  of  July  it  was 
$27.67,  and  on  August  2d  $52.54,  and  then  it  was  overdrawn 
$97.56,  and  on  the  5th  of  August  it  was  overdrawn  $47.66, 
and  this  overdraft  was  not  made  good  until  the  11th  of  the 
same  month,  and  then  a  deposit  of  $500  was  made. 

On  the  20th  of  August  he  had  $1,014.44  to  his  credit  ;  on 
the  21st  of  August  he  had  $414.44  ;  on  the  24th  of  August 
he  had  $6,709.44,  and  on  the  28th  of  August  he  had  $629.44, 
and  that  was  his  balance  on  the  morning  of  the  giving  of  the 
testimony  by  the  witness.  On  July  6,  two  checks  went  to 
protest  for  the  want  of  sufficient  funds,  checks  Nos.  106  and 
108  for  the  respective  sums  of  $123.17  and  $211.80.  When 
the  account  was  overdrawn  the  bookkeeper  notified  the  Mayor 
of  the  over-draft,  sending  word  to  his  office  twice,  first  a  writ- 
ten notice  and  then  a  verbal  message.  A  number  of  checks 
were  then  produced  running  from  July  20  to  August  27,  but 
the  first  check  in  the  year  1886  to  the  order  of  Frank  F.  Bell, 
City  Treasurer,  for  the  moneys  received  by  the  Mayor  for 
license  fees,  etc.,  was  for  $400,  dated  August  20.  The  second 
check  was  dated  August  23,  and  was  for  $2,300,  the  third  was 


464 


dated  August  24,  and  was  for  $5,300,  the  fourth  dated  the  same 
date  for  $670,  and  the  fifth  dated  August  27,  for  $128. 

It  was  admitted  by  his  Honor,  William  B.  Smith,  that  all 
the  moneys  that  came  into  his  hands  by  cash  and  by  check 
for  the  issuance  of  pawnbrokers'  licenses  were  deposited  by 
him  in  his  account  with  the  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and 
Safe  Deposit  Company,  and  it  was  proved  by  the  testimony  of 
Robert  M.  Scott,  the  general  bookkeeper  of  that  institution, 
that  these  moneys  were  drawn  upon  by  the  Mayor  for  his  per- 
sonal use,  and  that  he  had  no  other  account  in  that  bank  in 
which  these  moneys  were  deposited.  That  during  this  time 
the  balance  was  reduced  to  the  sum  of  $5.27,  and  at  times 
overdrawn.  Robert  P.  Dechert,  City  Controller,  submitted 
to  the  Committee  an  analysis  of  the  Mayor's  returns,  made 
on  the  27th  of  August,  compared  with  the  payments  made  by 
the  Mayor  into  the  City  Treasury.  At  the  close  of  January, 
1886,  he  should  have  paid  into  the  City  Treasury  $5,660,  and 
at  that  time  he  had  paid  nothing.  At  the  close  of  February 
he  had  collected  $6,470.  At  the  close  of  June,  his  collections 
had  increased  to  $8,432.39.  In  other  words,  at  the  end  of 
June  he  was  short  $8,432,39.  On  the  2d  of  July  the  short- 
age had  increased  to  $8,834.39,  and  on  the  13th  of  August 
the  amount  was  $9,008.53.  On  the  17th  of  August  $9,108.53, 
and  by  reason  of  a  payment  to  the  city  on  the  20th  of  August 
it  had  decreased  to  $8,483.53.  The  Controller  further  testi- 
fied that  in  May  or  June,  he  called  Mayor  Smith's  attention 
to  the  fact  that  no  money,  save  $2.50,  had  been  paid  into  the 
City  Treasury,  and  that  unless  there  was  a  payment  made, 
the  department  would  receive  no  credit  in  the  estimates  that 
were  being  prepared  for  Councils  upon  which  the  appropria- 
tions were  to  be  based  for  the  year  1887. 


465 


The  reply  of  the  Mayor  was,  that  the  matter  would  receive 
his  attention  promptly,  but  nothing  was  done.  The  above 
testimony  having  been  taken,  Mr.  Roberts,  the  Chairman, 
stated  publicly  that  it  was  the  sense  of  the  Committee  that 
the  Mayor  should  be  heard  personally,  or  by  counsel,  and  also 
any  witnesses  that  the  Mayor  might  designate  should  be  heard 
before  the  Committee,  and  that  it  would  give  the  Chair,  as 
representing  the  Committee,  great  pleasure  to  issue  orders  for 
any  subpoenas  desired  by  the  Mayor  or  his  counsel.  After 
this  announcement  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  the 
first  witness  to  appear  was  Howard  March,  Chief  Clerk  to  the 
Mayor,  who  testified  that  it  was  his  duty  to  collect  the  fines  of 
policemen  and  the  penalties  for  redemption  of  dogs.  That  in 
1884  he  collected  for  redemption  of  dogs  $1,140.  That  of 
that  amount  he  turned  into  the  City  Treasury  $810,  and  re- 
tained in  his  possession  $330.  In  1886  he  collected  from  this 
same  source  $1,784,  of  which  amount  he  paid  into  the  City 
Treasury  $1,084,  retaining  in  his  possession  $700.  In  1886 
he  collected  $1,148,  all  of  which  money  he  returned  to  the 
City  Treasurer,  still  retaining  the  balance  of  City's  moneys 
he  had  collected  during  1884  and  1885,  amounting  to  $1,030, 
which,  after  giving  his  testimony,  the  Committee  directed  him 
to  pay  to  the  City  Treasurer. 

The  Committee  also  examined  as  witnesses  the  Chief  of 
Police  and  Mr.  Kelly,  the  Chief  of  Detectives,  a  number  of 
lieutenants,  and  some  special  officers,  among  the  latter  of  whom 
may  be  named  Alexander  Gray,  and  the  Committee  respect- 
fully refer  your  Honorable  Body  to  the  testimony  to  be  found 
on  pages  202  to  279. 

The  developments  made  in  the  testimony  produced  before 
the  Committee  resulted  in  bringing  about  the  resignation  of 
59 


466 


Alexander  Gray,  who  upon  the  stand  admitted  that  he  had 
sneaked  from  his  duties,"  and  that  he  would  do  so  again  if 
he  had  the  opportunity.  At  the  time  this  testimony  was  given, 
a  warrant  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Controller  for  his  pay  for 
the  month  of  August. 

John  L.  Linton  was  called  as  a  witness,  and  testified  that 
he  was  Secretary  to  the  Mayor  ;  that  he  had  altered  the  checks 
of  A.  J.  McGarry  and  Harvey  &  McGarry,  which  had  been 
received  by  him  in  payment  of  fees  for  pawnbroker's  licenses. 
That  the  alterations  in  the  checks  had  been  made  so  as  to 
enable  him  to  deposit  the  checks  to  the  credit  of  the  Mayor, 
in  the  name  of  "  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer."  He  further 
testified  that  no  parts  of  the  receipts  for  coal  oil,  theatrical 
or  gunpowder  licenses  ever  left  his  custody  from  the  date  of 
receipt  to  the  date  of  their  payment  into  the  City  Treasury. 
Yet  it  was  subsequently  shown,  on  the  testimony  of  reliable 
witnesses,  and  admitted  by  Mr.  Linton  himself,  that  he  had 
used  a  check  for  the  payment  of  his  rent — a  check  received 
from  the  Penn  Oil  Manufacturing  Company  in  payment  of 
their  coal  oil  license  for  1886.  It  was  also  in  evidence  that 
the  Secretary  to  the  Mayor  kept  no  books  of  account,  no 
books  showing  the  receipts  of  the  Mayor's  office  or  of  pay- 
ments to  the  City  Treasurer,  nor  were  there  any  books  in 
which  were  kept  the  records  of  the  details  connected  with  the 
issuance  of  licenses  to  pawnbrokers.  Without  commenting 
further  upon  the  methods  of  Mr.  Linton,  the  Committee  re- 
spectfully refers  to  his  printed  testimony. 

Hon.  William  B.  Smith  then  came  upon  the  stand.  The 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  asked  him  to  make  any  statement 
that  he  desired  to  make  bearing  upon  the  matter  under  investi- 
gation. He  testified  that  in  1884  he  instructed  Major  Linton, 


467 


who  was  his  secretary,  to  examine  into  the  matter  of  the  pawn- 
brokers licenses,  and  to  compel  the  payment  of  the  fees,  and 
a  compliance  with  the  conditions  required  by  law.  Early  in 
1885,  the  money  received  as  license  fees  was  placed  upon  de- 
posit in  the  Fidelity  Insurance  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit  Com- 
pany to  the  account  of  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer,  which 
was  a  general  account,  "  never  truly  official  and  even  personal." 
He  further  admitted  that  the  said  money  which  was  so  de- 
posited had  been  drawn  against  and  used  by  him  for  his  own 
purposes,  and  that  at  the  time  he  felt  completely  satisfied  that 
the  City  of  Philadelphia  could  not  be  put  to  any  loss,  as  he 
always  had  resources  far  more  than  the  amount  so  deposited, 
subject  at  any  time  to  any  demand  from  the  city.  He  testified 
that  when  this  demand  was  made  upon  him  he  could  have  paid 
the  City  Treasurer,  in  direct  cash,  out  of  the  safe  in  his  office  ? 

In  regard  to  the  money  for  the  redemption  of  dogs,  he 
stated  that  he  assigned  Mr.  March  as  the  agent  to  receive  all 
moneys  from  that  source.  It  will  be  seen  by  a  reference  to 
the  testimony  of  the  Mayor,  to  be  found  in  the  printed  testi- 
mony from  pages  337  to  394,  that  the  defence  set  up  by  the 
Mayor,  as  to  the  use  of  this  money,  was  in  order  to  remove 
any  suspicion  of  an  intention  on  his  part  to  misuse  it  or  mis- 
appropriate it,  and  that  he  felt  himself  able  at  all  times  to 
meet  every  demand  from  the  City  for  these  moneys,  as  he  had 
a  greater  sum  in  his  safe,  or  in  his  pocket,  than  was  due  the 
City,  but  that  he  did  not  so  pay  it  while  these  charges  were 
being  made,  simply  because  he  did  not  care  to  be  driven.  In 
corroboration  of  these  statements  Mr.  Fell,  a  clerk  in  the 
office  of  the  Mayor,  testified  that  there  was  a  private  safe  in 
the  office  in  which  the  Mayor  kept  large  sums  of  money.  Mr. 
Fell  also  stated  that  upon  one  occasion,  the  date  he  could  not 


468 


remember,  he  thought  he  counted  the  sum  of  $15,000,  and 
that  the  money  so  deposited  was  in  packages ;  and,  in  further 
corroboration,  Isaac  H.  Shields,  Esq.,  counsel  of  the  Mayor, 
said  at  one  time,  seeing  a  large  package  of  money  in  the  safe, 
although  he  did  not  know  the  amount,  he  told  the  Major  that 
it  was  not  prudent  to  keep  money  in  that  way. 

The  Committee,  after  a  careful  examination  into  and  a  con- 
scientious consideration  of  all  the  facts,  says  with  great  reluc- 
tance that  it  is  most  difficult  to  believe  the  statement  of  the 
Mayor  that  he  had  at  all  times  in  his  safe  sums  of  money 
ranging  from  $5,000  to  $15,000,  which  money  was  kept  as  se- 
curity for  the  deposits  in  bank,  that  he  might  at  all  times  be 
ready  to  meet  any  demands  from  the  City  for  the  return  of  the 
license  fees.  This  late  defence  is  not  consistent  with  the  early 
statements  of  the  Mayor  in  relation  to  the  matter.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  the  Controller  in  May  or  June  called  upon 
him  personally  for  an  annual  estimate,  and  for  a  return  into 
the  City  Treasury  of  all  the  moneys  collected  by  his  depart- 
ment ;  that  the  balance  to  his  credit  in  the  Fidelity  Company 
w^as  upon  one  occasion  reduced  to  the  sum  of  $5.27,  at  other 
times  overdrawn,  and  in  July  his  checks  had  gone  to  protest. 
That  serious  charges  and  accusations  were  affecting  his  stand- 
ing as  a  man,  his  reputation  as  a  public  officer,  and  the  fair 
fame  of  the  City. 

The  Committee  does  not  think  it  probable  that  any  man, 
under  such  circumstances,  if  proof  had  been  so  close  at  hand 
would  have  failed  to  remove  from  his  name  the  reproach  and 
shame  that  was  cast  upon  it.  And  even  when  the  Controller 
was  making  an  audit  of  the  account  at  the  office  of  the  Mayor, 
and  calling  for  the  production  of  the  deposit  and  check  books, 
not  a  single  reference  was  made  to  the  money  in  the  safe,  the 


469 


very  production  of  which,  with  proof  that  it  had  always  been 
kept  to  secure  payment  in  case  a  speedy  demand  should  be 
made,  would  have  relieved  him  of  the  serious  charge  of  the 
embezzlement  of  public  funds.  And  the  Committee  is  further 
constrained  to  find  that  the  tescimony  of  Mr.  Fell  does  not 
corroborate  the  testimony  of  the  Mayor  upon  the  point  that  he 
had  money  at  all  times  in  the  safe  in  sums  sufficient  to  secure 
the  payment  of  the  moneys  received  for  the  city  on  deposit,  to 
the  credit  of  the  Mayor  in  the  Fidelity  Insurance,  Trust  and 
Safe  Deposit  Company,  inasmuch  as  Mr.  Fell  did  not  know 
the  amounts  of  money  that  were  in  the  safe,  and  kept  no  ac- 
count of  them,  although  in  a  measure  he  was  the  custodian 
and  the  only  person,  except  the  Mayor,  who  knew  the  combi- 
nation to  the  safe.  He  did  testify  that  upon  one  occasion  he 
thought  he  handled  and  counted  $15,000,  but  could  not  tell 
when  it  was.  He  kept  no  memorandum  of  the  amount,  and 
could  not  state  the  amounts  that  were  in  that  safe  at  different 
times ;  in  fact  admitted  that  he  refrained  from  ascertaining 
the  amounts  ;  nor  could  he  tell  what  sum  of  money  was  taken 
out  of  the  safe  the  day  the  deposit  was  made.  The  testimony, 
also,  of  Isaac  H.  Shields,  Esq.,  is  not  in  corroboration  of  the 
statement  made  by  the  Mayor.  The  fact  that  he,  at  one  time, 
called  the  Mayor's  attention  to  the  keeping  of  a  large  sum  of 
money  in  the  safe,  in  no  wise  proves  that  that  amount  of  money 
was  kept  there  at  other  times,  and  all  times,  for  the  purpose  of 
meeting  just  such  a  demand  as  was  afterwards  made  by  the 
Controller,  and  after  some  delay  complied  with  by  the  Mayor. 

It  is  respectfully  submitted  by  the  Committee  that  the  most 
careful  consideration  has  been  given  to  the  testimony  received. 
That  under  the  resolution  its  simple  duty  was  to  find  the  truth 
or  falsity  of  any  of  the  charges  and  accusations  made  against 


470 


the  Honorable  William  B.  Smith,  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia.  That  without  prejudice,  bias  or  feeling,  it  has 
been  the  simple  purpose  of  the  Committee  to  call  every  witness 
who  could  in  any  way  throw  light  upon  the  charges  made. 
But,  under  the  resolution,  the  Committee  is  of  the  opinion 
that  there  is  no  middle  course  for  it  to  adopt. 

A  reference  to  the  resolution  will  show  what  is  required  of 
the  Committee,  it  reads  as  follows  :  "  And  the  said  Committee 
are  hereby  instructed  and  directed  to  make  report  to  Common 
Council  as  to  the  truth  or  falsity  of  such  accusations,  and  if 
the  truth  of  such  accusations  be  established  by  the  facts,  and 
proofs  exhibited  before  said  Committee,  that  their  report  be  ac- 
companied by  articles  of  impeachment,"  in  other  words,  that 
the  report  be  in  favor  of  impeachment. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  resolution  directs  if  all  or  any  of  the 
said  accusations  be  established  that  the  Committee  must  report 
in  favor  of  impeachment,  and  in  order  to  find  for  impeachment 
the  Committee  is  of  opinion  that  it  is  not  necessary  that  the 
Mayor  should  be  guilty  of  a  crime,  but  that  mal-administration, 
misuse  of  public  funds,  negligence  and  carelessness  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  the  office,  by  reason  of  which  negligence 
and  carelessness  opportunities  were  given  for  the  commission 
of  crimes,  are  such  malfeasance  and  mal-administration  as  will 
subject  the  Executive  of  the  Department  to  impeachment. 

The  Committee  submits  the  following  as  its  findings  upon 
the  charges  preferred,  and  the  testimony  submitted  :  That  his. 
Honor,  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia, 
is  guilty  of  misdemeanor  and  mal-administration  in  office : 

1.  By  receiving  and  retaining  money  paid  for  license  fees, 
which  it  was  not  made  his  duty  by  any  law  or  ordinance  to 
receive,  and  then  appropriating  said  money  to  his  own  use. 


471 


2.  By  retaining  moneys  received  during  the  years  1885 
and  1886,  and  neglecting  to  pay  the  same  into  the  City 
Treasury  in  accordance  with  the  ordinance  of  the  city,  ap- 
proved the  tAventy-third  day  of  December,  1872. 

3.  By  failing  to  enforce  the  ordinance  of  January  19,  1856, 
regulating  the  trade  of  business  of  pawnbrokers,  thereby  per- 
mitting the  said  trade,  or  business,  to  be  unlawfully  carried  on 
in  1885,  until  the  latter  end  of  the  year,  and  in  1886,  until 
August,  and  in  some  cases  up  to  the  present  time,  without  the 
licenses  required  by  said  ordinance  being  first  obtained. 

4.  By  failing  to  exercise  proper  supervision  over  the  affairs 
of  his  office,  whereby  moneys  belonging  to  the  city  were 
collected  during  the  years  1884  and  1885,  and  retained  in  the 
alleged  possession  of  his  Chief  Clerk,  who  made  no  return  to 
the  City  Treasurer  or  to  the  City  Controller  of  moneys  so 
received,  and  so  retained,  until  forced  to  do  so  from  fear  of 
discovery  in  the  investigation  of  these  charges  by  this  Com- 
mittee. 

5.  In  that  he  was  negligent  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  as 
a  sworn  public  official,  whereby  it  was  possible  for  John  L. 
Linton,  the  Mayor's  private  Secretary,  to  alter  checks,  drawn 
to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer  that  the  Mayor  might  de- 
posit them  in  his  private  bank  account,  and  that  it  was  possible 
for  the  said  John  L.  Linton  to  receive  and  retain  public 
moneys  and  appropriate  the  same  to  his  own  use,  which  moneys 
should  have  been  paid  into  the  City  Treasury,  and  in  that  the 
said  John  L.  Linton  was  not  required  to  keep  any  books  of 
account  nor  to  make  return  of  those  moneys  which  he  had  been 
delegated  by  the  Mayor  to  collect. 


4T2 


6.  By  reason  of  his  negligence  in  the  supervision  of  the 
Police  Department,  special  officers  were  appointed  whose  dere- 
liction of  duty  had  to  be  admitted,  and  whose  services  were  so 
seldom  rendered  that  they  could  not  account  before  the  Com- 
mittee for  the  work  for  which  they  received  pay  from  the  city. 

The  Committee  recommends  the  adoption  of  the  following 
resolution : 

Resolved^  By  the  Common  Council  of  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia^ That  the  Honorable  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor  of 
Philadelphia,  be,  and  hereby  is,  impeached  for  misdemeanor 
and  maladministration  in  office. 

Chas.  Roberts  {Ch'n),  Henry  Clay, 

Geo.  B.  Edwards,  Alex.  Reinstine^ 

Chas.  F.  Iseminger,  John  Bardsley, 

Chas.  Lawrence. 


MINORITY  REPORT. 


Philadelphia^  September  13,  1886. 

To  the  President  and  Members  of  the  Common  Counoil 

of  the  City  of  Philadelphia. 

Gentlemen  : — As  a  member  of  the  Committee  to  investi- 
gate the  accusations  against  Hon.  William  B.  Smith,  Mayor 
of  Philadelphia,  I  present  the  following  report : 

The  resolution  under  which  this  Committee  was  appointed 
cites — 

Firstly — That  whereas.  Honorable  William  B.  Smith, 
Mayor  of  Philadelphia,  has  been  openly  and  publicly  accused 
of  high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  in  office,  by  the  embezzle- 
ment and  misuse  of  public  moneys  which  have  come  into  his 
hands. 

Secondly — And  with  unlawfully  changing  and  so  altering 
checks  drawn  to  the  order  of  the  City  Treasurer,  in  payment 
of  fees  due  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  as  to  be  enabled  to  de- 
posit such  checks  in  a  private  banking  institution  to  his 
account,  and  unlawfully  retain,  embezzle,  and  misuse  the 
moneys  realized  therefrom. 

Thirdly — And  of  other  acts  and  deeds  inconsistent  with  the 
high  office  of  Mayor  and  the  proper  management  of  the  de- 
partment under  him,  the  same  being  in  violation  of  the  laws- 

(473) 


474 


and  ordinances  governing  and  regulating  the  affairs  of  the  City 
of  Philadelphia. 

The  Committee,  as  a  body,  find  that  the  charge  of  embezzle- 
ment and  that  of  altering  of  checks  by  the  Mayor  has  not 
been  sustained.  Under  the  broad  specification  of  "  Misde- 
meanor in  office  "  I  am  compelled  to  disagree  with  some  of  my 
colleagues  as  to  their  judgment.  My  reasons  for  this  dissent 
are :  That  in  an  opinion  given  by  the  City  Solicitor  to  his 
Honor,  the  Mayor,  on  the  2?d  of  August,  in  reply  to  a  letter 
from  the  Mayor,  he  believed  that  the  pawnbrokers'  license 
money,  lawfully^  should  have  been  paid  direct  into  the  City 
Treasury  by  them,  and  the  City  Treasurer's  receipt  then  to  be 
presented  to  the  Mayor  as  evidence  that  the  license  money 
was  paid ;  whereupon  the  Mayor  should  see  that  the  require- 
ments of  the  law  was  complied  with  and  the  necessary  license 
issued. 

Further^  That  the  Mayor,  in  his  testimony,  swore  that  he 
did  not  regard  this  money  paid  into  his  hands  as  the  city's 
money,  and  that  by  the  advice  of  his  counsel,  the  money  re- 
ceived from  the  pawnbrokers  was  not  the  city's  money,  and 
that  he  was  not  acting  as  the  agent  of  the  city,  but  as  the 
agent  of  the  pawnbrokers,  in  receiving  and  retaining  these 
pawnbrokers  license  fees,  which  evidence  was  corroborated  by 
the  counsel  who  gave  this  advice  (Isaac  H.  Shields,  Esq.),  and 
further  testimony  of  the  Mayor,  which  was  corroborated  and  un- 
contradicted ;  that  he  had  at  all  times  sufficient  ready  money  in 
the  safe  in  his  office  to  meet  any  and  all  just  demands  upon  him, 
and  that  when  this  question  of  paying  this  money,  which  was  in 
his  hands,  into  the  City  Treasury,  became  a  matter  of  public  com- 
ment, he  sought  the  advice  of  the  City  Solicitor  (his  private  coun- 
sel being  away  from  the  city  at  the  time)  and  upon  the  same 


475 


day,  upon  receiving  the  advice  from  the  City  Solicitor  that 
the  moneys  should  be  paid  into  the  City  Treasury,  that  they 
were  so  paid ;  thus  showing  no  disposition  to  retain  them,  or 
to  do  aught  than  what  he  considered  his  proper  duty  to  do, 
under  the  circumstances.  That  while  the  evidence  submitted 
to  them  shows  that  the  methods  of  the  office  could  be  greatly 
improved,  that  the  Chief  Executive  has  been  careless  in  the 
supervision  of  his  subordinates,  who  first  received  these 
moneys,  and  that  these  same  subordinates  have  been  guilty 
of  irregularities  and  reprehensible  acts,  that  I  do  not  consider 
that  it  has  been  substantiated  that  the  Mayor  has  been  guilty 
of  the  serious  charge  which  has  been  made  against  him,  and 
therefore  I  consider  it  a  duty  which  I  owe  to  my  own  con- 
science, arising  from  convictions  which  have  been  born  from 
the  evidence  adduced  before  the  Committee,  that  nothing  has 
appeared  before  the  Committee  which  calls  for  or  which  would, 
in  any  degree,  justify  them  in  presenting  articles  of  impeach- 
ment ;  therefore. 

Resolved,  That  this  report  be  adopted,  and  the  Committee 
be  discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the  subject. 
Respectfully  submitted, 

WM.  R.  CLARIDGE,  JR., 

Of  Committee  on  Investigation. 


i 


i 


INDEX. 


Communications. 

Page 

From  Smith,  William  B.,  letter   7 

From     "  "        receipts  of  Police  Department,  from  1876  to 

1886   395 

From  McClure,  A.  K   92 

From  Dechert,  K.  P.,  City  Controller,  reference  to  receipts  from  all 

sources  paid  City  Treasurer  by  William  B.  Smith,  1886   140 

Schedule  of  balances  in  hands  of  Mayor,  for  1886   142 

From  Linton,  John  L   361 

From  March,  Howard,  contract  for  taking  up  of  dogs   166 

From  Scott,  Eobert  H.,  reference  to  William  B.  Smith,  Treasurer, 

in  account  with  the  Fidelity  Insurance  Trust  and  Safe  Deposit 

Company   95 

Protested  checks  106,  108 

Resolution  to  appoint  Committee   3 

Report  of  Committee  (Majority)   459 

Report  of  Committee  (Minority)     473 

Witnesses. 

Abrahams,  Benjamin     116 

Allison,  Albert  C  ,   213 

Ash,  Joseph  R   202 

Baker,  Andrew  J   67 

Baldwin,  W.  R   205 

Bosbyshell,  Oliver  C   146 

(477) 


478 

Page 

Catherine,  Joseph  W   148 

Creir,  J.  Lewis   I95 

Dechert,  Kobert  P  120,  20O 

Devine,  Elizabeth   190 

Dungan,  William  L  212,  218 

Fell,  William  F   396 

Garman,  A   87 

Gray,  Alexander  234,  418 

Hamburg,  Moses  P   58 

Harvey,  Joseph  1   211 

Hunt,  Isaac  P  75,  81 

Jones,  Henry  A   85 

Johnson,  George  W  5,  82 

Kelly,  Francis  R   226 

Kendrick,  William  D   72 

Linton,  John  L  279,  321,  416,  431,  436,  442 

Lukens,  Ezra   425 

Levy,  Abraham   78 

Linse,  Solomon  L    12,  193 

Lyons,  Edward  H   233 

Lovatt,  Thomas  B   194 

McLaughlin,  John   247 

March,  Howard   163 

Mekeal,  Joseph   37 

McGarry,  A.  J  26,  88 

McCaughin,  George  H   186 

Myers,  Jacob   63 


479 


Page 

Nathans,  Samuel   20 

Eichardson,  William   198 

Kpsenbaum,  Adolph   76 

Rosenthal,  Daniel   47 

Eosenthal,  Jacob  42,  56 

Spittall,  William  B   163 

Scott,  Robert  H  93,  115,  152 

Smith,  William  B  336,  415 

Stewart,  James,  Jr   249 

Shields,  Isaac  PI  333,  427 

Smith,  John  F     424 

Stephenson,  James  H   197 

Usilton,  Edwin  L   220 

Van  Blunk,  Francis  C   439 

Wood,  Charles  W   429 


